Home Store Products Research Design Strategy Support New
 Research US War Dept. Official Records HTML Ser. II, Vol. 1, Ch. 2.

THE
WAR OF THE REBELLION:
A COMPILATION OF THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS
OF THE
UNION AND CONFEDERATE ARMIES.

{p.105}

SERIES II, VOL I.
PRISONERS OF WAR, ETC.
–––
EARLIER CAPTURES AND ARRESTS, AND MEASURES OF PACIFICATION IN MISSOURI.

–––

SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL EVENTS.

Mar.13, 1861.–Capt. Nathaniel Lyon, Second U. S. Infantry, assigned to the command of Saint Louis Arsenal, with subsequent orders to arm loyal citizens and execute the laws.
May6, 1861.–Brig. Gen. Daniel M. Frost, Missouri State Militia, establishes a camp of instruction near Saint Louis, by direction of the governor of Missouri.
10, 1861.–Capt. Nathaniel Lyon, Second U. S. Infantry, with a force of U. S. volunteers, makes prisoners of General Frost and his entire command of Missouri Militia.
16, 1861.–Capt. Nelson Cole, Fifth Missouri Infantry, enters Potosi and arrests a number of citizens.
July5, 1861.–Brig. Gen. Ben. McCulloch, C. S. Army, at Neosho, captures and paroles eighty Union soldiers belonging to the command of Brig. Gen. Franz Sigel, U. S. Army.
29, 1861.–Brig. Gen. John Pope, U. S. Army, assumes command in North Missouri, with instructions to protect the railroads and suppress local disorders.
31, 1861.–Brig. Gen. John Pope, U. S. Army, issues General Orders, No. 3, and formulates a plan for the suppression of the lawless elements and permanent pacification of North Missouri.
Aug.16, 1861.–Marauders fire into a passenger train upon the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad.
28, 1861.–The War Department, at Washington, directs that certain paroled prisoners be discharged from the military service of the United States.
30, 1861.–Maj. Gen. John C. Frémont, U. S. Army, proclaims martial law throughout Missouri; orders the arrest of all disloyal persons found within the Union lines armed, and the confiscation of their property, and directs that the extreme penalty of the law be inflicted on the destroyers of railroad and telegraph lines, bridges, &c.
Sept.2, 1861.–Brig. Gen. M. Jeff. Thompson, C. S. Army, issues a proclamation threatening retaliation.
3, 1861.–Brig. Gen. Gideon J. Pillow, C. S. Army, and Col. William H. L. Wallace, Eleventh Illinois Infantry, negotiate an exchange of prisoners of war.
20, 1861.–Maj. Gen. Sterling Price, Missouri State Guard, captures Lexington and the U. S. forces under command of Col. James A. Mulligan, Twenty third Illinois Infantry. {p.106}
Oct.26, 1861.–Maj. Gen. John C. Frémont, U. S. Army, commanding the Western Department, and Maj. Gen. Sterling Price, Missouri State Guard, commanding Confederate forces in Missouri, conclude an agreement for the exchange of prisoners.
Nov.7, 1861.–Maj. Gen. David Hunter, U. S. Army, successor of General Frémont, repudiates the Frémont-Price convention.
Jan.12, 1862.–Maj. Gen. Sterling Price, Missouri State Guard, writes to Maj. Gen. Henry W. Halleck, U. S. Army, commanding Department of the Missouri, protesting against the capital punishment of his men for bridge burning, &c.

CONTENTS.

Miscellaneous Captures; Treatment of Political and Military Prisoners, and Tentative Efforts at Exchange.123
Union Methods of Dealing with Guerrillas and the Lawless Elements of Missouri.184
Trial by Military Commission of Bridge-Burners, Marauders, Etc.282
The Pillow-Wallace Agreement to Exchange Prisoners.504
Negotiations for Exchange of Prisoners between Generals Grant and Polk and their Subordinates.511
The Fremont-Price Exchange Convention, and Agreement to Discontinue Arrests for Political Opinions.548

Capture and Parole of the Camp Jackson (Mo.) Militia.-Final Disposition of the Prisoners.

[For Reports, Orders, Correspondence, etc., relating to contemporaneous military and political events in Missouri not found hereinafter, see Series I, Vol. I, p. 637 et seq.; Vol. III, pp. 1-749; and Vol. VIII, pp. 1-834.]

–––

WASHINGTON CITY, March 11, 1861.

Hon. SIMON CAMERON, Secretary of War.

DEAR SIR: Our friends in Saint Louis desire that Captain Lyon may have the command of the troops at the Saint Louis Arsenal, and be charged with its defense, and that Major Hagner be required simply to take charge of the ordnance department. Captain Lyon ranks Major Hagner and would have command of the troops except for the fact that Major Hagner is assigned to duty according to his brevet rank. I ask in behalf of our friends that this assignment may be rescinded and the command of the troops given to Captain Lyon.

Respectfully,

FRANK P. BLAIR.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 74.}

WAR DEPT., ADJT. GENERAL’S OFFICE, Washington, March 13, 1861.

Capt. N. Lyon, Second Infantry, the senior officer of the line present and on duty at Saint Louis Arsenal, Mo., is assigned to the command of the troops and defenses at that post.

By order of the Secretary of War:

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.

–––

ADJUTANT-GENERAL’S OFFICE, Washington, April 21, 1861.

Capt. N. LYON, Second Infantry, East Saint Louis:

General Harney has this day been relieved from his command. The Secretary of War directs that you immediately execute the order previously given to arm the loyal citizens, to protect the public property and execute the laws. Muster four regiments into the service.

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.

{p.107}

–––

LEBANON, ILL., May 11, 1861.

Hon. SIMON CAMERON, Secretary of War:

Two thousand troops, under Captain Lyon, surrounded Camp Jackson yesterday; took 1,200 State troops, with camp equipage, into custody. Cannon stolen at Baton Rouge were recovered. Prisoners were offered release on parole but refused it. They were marched to arsenal an hour after surrender. Excited populace grossly outraged U. S. troops, and finally fired on them. The fire was returned, but immediately suppressed by Captain Lyon; 15 or 20 populace, 3 U. S. troops wounded. Intense excitement in the city. Four thousand home guards under arms patrolling streets all night. Habeas corpus writs will be applied for to-day to release prisoners, but will be disregarded by Lyon. Many prisoners marched through streets hurrahing for Jeff. Davis. Left arsenal at midnight; will arrive Monday at Washington. Our friends fear return of Harney to Saint Louis and protest against it.

J. B. EADS.

–––

WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, D. C., May 11, 1861.

J. T. SANDERSON, Chief Clerk:

The following has just been received from Saint Louis:

General Frost’s brigade Missouri militia at Camp Jackson surrendered unconditionally at demand of Federal troops. Release on parole offered but declined on ground that to take oath would imply they had been in arms against U. S. authorities which they [denied]. While State troops were drawn up between two lines Union volunteers, stones were thrown, pistols were shot, one of which entered leg of Captain Blandowsky, who, while falling, gave command to fire. Twenty persons, including two women and several children, killed and many others wounded. Great excitement, and Republican newspapers threatened by mob.

P. S. SANDERSON.

–––

SAINT LOUIS ARSENAL, May 11, 1861.

Col. L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army.

SIR: In compliance with instructions from your office of the 30th ultimo, I accepted, swore in, and armed 3,436 men and 70 officers of the loyal citizens of Saint Louis, as a reserve corps, for the protection of Government property and enforcement of its laws, on the 7th and 8th instant, and should probably have still further proceeded in receiving further offers but for events to which I will now advert. The steamer J. C. Swan arrived at Saint Louis on the night of the 8th, with a large supply of military stores, including, as I was informed, muskets, ammunition, and cannon taken on board at Baton Rouge, and there obtained from the arsenal. The boat arriving in the night great industry was used to transport these stores during the night (and before being likely to be exposed in the morning) to the camp of what is called the State militia, and which is made up for the most part of what has for a long time been known as a body of rabid and violent opposers of the General Government, and who have, during this time, been a terror to all loyal and peaceful citizens.

Their extraordinary and unscrupulous conduct, and their evident design, and or the governor of this State, to take a position of hostility {p.108} to the United States, are matters of extensive detail and of abounding evidence. Having appealed to the South for assistance every appearance indicated a rapid accumulation of men and means for seizing Government property and overturning its authority. I accordingly foresaw that under the extraordinary measures of the governor and Legislature of this State aggressions would soon commence against the General Government on the part of these opposers of it, and of all who were in such a state of hostilities, willing to support the State against the Government. Of this there can be no doubt, as also that the issue would be taken by the State as soon as she felt able to sustain it. It was therefore necessary to meet this embarrassing complication as early as possible, and accordingly I proceeded yesterday with a large body of troops, supported by artillery, to the camp above referred to, and which is situated in the western part of the city, at what is known as Lindell’s Grove, between Olive street and Laclede avenue, and arrived at 3.15 p.m., and demanded of General Frost, the commander, a surrender of his entire command. Copies of the correspondence are herewith inclosed.*

Of the stores from Baton Rouge Arsenal, so far as understood, there were found three 32-pounder guns, one mortar, three mortar beds, and a large supply of shot and shells in ale barrels. All these artillery pieces were in boxes of heavy plank, and were addressed “Tamoroa, care of Greely & Gale, Saint Louis,” “I. C. R. R.,” to whom no delivery was made, this being a guise to cover the movement, and Greely & Gale being known as strong Union men saved them from close scrutiny. No doubt many arms, the mortars corresponding to the beds, and other war materials were received, agreeably to numerous reports made, but which can be obtained only by a thorough search over the city. Of the material besides tents, baggage, camp equipments, &c., left in camp by the troops, were 1,200 rifle muskets of U. S. manufacture, late model, .58 caliber; 6 field pieces, brass; 25 kegs of powder; from 30 to 40 horses; and several arm-chests of arms understood to be like the 1,200 muskets mentioned.

During the surrender of Camp Jackson and their passage into our lines a mob attacked our force, a published account of which will be transmitted.** The prisoners, some 50 officers and 639 men, were marched under guard to this post, previous to which Camp Jackson was taken possession of by two regiments of volunteers and two companies of regulars, under command of Captain Sweeny, who remained in possession all night, bringing the entire camp equipage and munitions of war into this arsenal this morning. To-day the prisoners were all released (with the exception of one captain, who declined this parole)-the officers on their parole of honor not to fight against the United States during this war, and the men on their oath to the same effect.

You will see by the returns of an election of brigadier-general for the volunteer brigade raised here that I have been elected to this office, which, so far as depends upon me, I have accepted, and the duties of which I am now performing under the authority of the President. This subject is submitted for such action as the Department may determine to be proper.

Since the foregoing was written I have noticed among the stores taken from Camp Jackson were parts of muskets, all separate, and apparently without ever having been put together, and were doubtless taken in this condition from the arsenal.

{p.109}

It is proper and gratifying to mention that Captain Callender, in charge of the ordnance, has not, either through punctilious exactions about forms and responsibilities or assumed monopoly of corps above the power of the Government itself, attempted to embarrass me, but, on the contrary, has cordially and most efficiently co-operated to advance the Government interests.

Col. F. A. Dick of this city who has to this time served as adjutant-general of the brigade of volunteers, will be the bearer of this, and visits Washington on business connected with the Government interests at this place.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. LYON, Captain, Second Infantry, Commanding.

* For Frost’s second letter of May 10, inclosed by Lyon, see Frost to Harney, May 11.

** No such inclosure found.

[Inclosure No. 1.]

HEADQUARTERS CAMP JACKSON, MISSOURI MILITIA, May 10, 1861.

Capt. N. LYON, Commanding U. S. Troops in and about St. Louis Arsenal.

SIR: I am constantly in receipt of information that you contemplate an attack upon my camp, whilst I understand that you are impressed with the idea that an attack upon the arsenal and U. S. troops is intended on the part of the militia of Missouri. I am greatly at a loss to know what could justify you in attacking citizens of the United States who are in the lawful performance of duties devolving upon them under the Constitution in organizing and instructing the militia of the State in obedience to her laws, and therefore have been disposed to doubt the correctness of the information I have received.

I would be glad to know from you personally whether there is any truth in the statements that are constantly poured into my ears. So far as regards any hostility being intended toward the United States or its property or representatives, by any portion of my command, or, as far as I can learn (and I think I am fully informed), of any other part of the State forces, I can say positively that the idea has never been entertained. On the contrary, prior to your taking command of the arsenal, I proffered to Major Bell, then in command of the very few troops constituting its guard, the services of myself and all my command, and, if necessary, the whole power of the State, to protect the United States in the full possession of all her property. Upon General Harney’s taking command of this department I made the same proffer of services to him, and authorized his adjutant-general, Captain Williams, to communicate the fact that such had been done to the War Department. I have had no occasion since to change any of the views I entertained at that time, neither of my own volition nor through the orders of my constitutional commander.

I trust that, after this explicit statement, we may be able, by fully understanding each other, to keep far from our borders the misfortunes which so unhappily afflict our common country.

This communication will be handed to you by Colonel Bowen, my chief of staff, who will be able to explain anything not fully set forth in the foregoing.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

D. M. FROST, Brig. Gen., Comdg. Camp Jackson, Missouri Vol. Militia.

{p.110}

[Inclosure No. 2.]

HEADQUARTERS U. S. TROOPS, Saint Louis, Mo., May 10, 1861.

General D. M. FROST, Commanding Camp Jackson.

SIR: Your command is regarded as evidently hostile toward the Government of the United States. It is, for the most part, made up of those secessionists who have openly avowed their hostility to the General Government and have been plotting at the seizure of its property and the overthrow of its authority.

You are openly in communication with the so-called Southern Confederacy, which is now at war with the United States; and you are receiving at your camp from the said Confederacy and under its flag large supplies of the material of war, most of which is known to be the property of the United States.

These extraordinary preparations plainly indicate none other than the well-known purpose of the governor of this State, under whose orders you are acting, and whose purposes, recently communicated to the Legislature, have just been responded to by that body in the most unparalleled legislation, having in direct view hostilities to the General Government and co-operation with its enemies.

In view of these considerations, and of your failure to disperse in obedience to the proclamation of the President, and of the eminent necessities of State policy and welfare, and the obligations imposed upon me by instructions from Washington, it is my duty to demand, and I do hereby demand, of you an immediate surrender of your command, with no other conditions than that all persons surrendering under this demand shall be humanely and kindly treated. Believing myself prepared to enforce this demand one-half hour’s time before doing so will be allowed for your compliance therewith.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. LYON, Captain, Second Infantry, Comdg. Troops.

–––

SAINT LOUIS ARSENAL, May 12, 1861.

Col. L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army, Washington.

SIR:

...

It is with great delicacy and hesitancy I take the liberty to observe that the energetic and necessary measures of day before yesterday, and reported in my communication of yesterday, require persevering and consistent exertion to effect the object in view of anticipating combinations and measures of hostility against the General Government, and that the authority of General Harney under these circumstances embarrasses, in the most painful manner, the execution of the plans I had contemplated, and upon which the safety and welfare of the Government as I conceive so much depend, and which must be decided in a very short period.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. LYON, Captain, Second Infantry, Commanding.

{p.111}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., May 13, 1861.

Lieut. Col. E. D. TOWNSEND, Asst. Adjt. Gen., Hdqrs. of the Army, Washington, D. C.

SIR: I have the honor to report for the information of the general-in-chief that in obedience to the instructions of the honorable Secretary of War, communicated to me through the Adjutant-General of the Army, I resumed command of the Department of the West the 11th instant. On my arrival at Saint Louis I found very great excitement prevailing throughout the community in consequence of the capture on the 10th instant of the brigade of Missouri militia under the command of Brig. Gen. D. M. Frost while in camp near this city by the U. S. forces under the command of Capt. N. Lyon, Second Infantry. I am informed that a detailed report of that affair was forwarded previous to my resuming command of the department, but I deem it proper to state that the conduct of Captain Lyon on the occasion meets with my entire approval.

As serious apprehensions were entertained yesterday morning that the excitement existing in the city would result in an outbreak in the course of a few hours unless allayed, I deemed it necessary to issue a proclamation, of which the inclosed is a copy, and which I am assured was well received and had the effect to tranquilize the public mind. I also ordered up from the arsenal some 250 regular troops with four pieces of artillery to aid the civil authorities in the preservation of the public peace. I am happy to add that all indications of the threatened disturbance have disappeared.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

WM. S. HARNEY, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

PROCLAMATION.

MILITARY DEPARTMENT OF THE WEST, Saint Louis, Mo., May 12, 1861.

I have just returned to this post and have assumed the military command of this department. No one can more deeply regret the deplorable state of things existing here than myself. The past cannot be recalled; I can only deal with the present and the future. I most anxiously desire to discharge the delicate and onerous duties devolved upon me so as to preserve the public peace. I shall carefully abstain from the exercise of any unnecessary powers and from all interference with the proper functions of the public officers of the State and city. I therefore call upon the public authorities and the people to aid me in preserving the public peace.

The military force stationed in this department by authority of the Government and now under my command will only be used in the last resort to preserve the peace. I trust I may be spared the necessity of resorting to martial law, but the public peace must be preserved and the lives and property of the people protected. Upon a careful review of my instructions I find I have no authority to change the location of the home guards. To avoid all cause of irritation and excitement if called upon to aid the local authorities in preserving the public peace I shall in preference make use of the Regular Army.

{p.112}

I ask the people to pursue their peaceable avocations, and to observe the laws and orders of their local authorities, and to abstain from the excitements of public meetings and heated discussions. My appeal I trust may not be in vain, and I pledge the faith of a soldier to the earnest discharge of my duty.

WM. S. HARNEY, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army, Commanding Department.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE WEST, Saint Louis, Mo., May 17, 1861.

Capt. N. LYON, Second Infantry, Comdg. Troops, Saint Louis Arsenal, Mo.

SIR: The commanding general desires that you will furnish him by the bearer with a certified copy of the parole given by the members of the brigade of Missouri Volunteers captured at Camp Jackson the 10th instant by the forces of the United States under your command.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

S. WILLIAMS, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS ARSENAL, May 17, 1861.

Capt. S. WILLIAMS, Headquarters Department of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: The parole given by the officers taken at Camp Jackson was kept by Lieutenant Schofield, who is not at present in the arsenal. The men of the ranks took the following oath:

You do solemnly swear that you will not serve in any capacity against the Government of the United States during the civil war now existing.

The parole of the officers, pretty much to the same effect, will be sent as soon as I can get it.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. LYON, Captain, Second Infantry, Commanding.

–––

SAINT LOUIS ARSENAL, May 17, 1861.

Capt. S. WILLIAMS.

DEAR SIR: The following is a verbatim copy of parole taken by staff and regimental officers:

We, the undersigned, do pledge our words as gentlemen that we will not take up arms or serve in any military capacity against the United States during the present civil war. This parole to be returned upon our surrendering ourselves at any time as prisoners of war. While we sign this parole with a full intention of observing it, we nevertheless protest against the justice of its exactions.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. LYON, Captain, Second Infantry, Commanding.

{p.113}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE WEST, Saint Louis, Mo., May 18, 1861.

Lieut. Col. E. D. TOWNSEND, Asst. Adjt. Gen., Hdqrs. of the Army, Washington, D. C.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith a communication addressed to me under date of the 11th instant by Brig. Gen. D. M. Frost, Missouri Volunteer Militia, in relation to the capture of his command at Camp Jackson near this city, May 10, 1861, by the U. S. troops under the command of Capt. N. Lyon, Second Infantry.

I respectfully request the instructions of the Government respecting the transaction to which General Frost invites attention, and I recommend that the private property captured, munitions of war excepted, be restored.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

WM. S. HARNEY, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

SAINT LOUIS ARSENAL. Mo., May 11, 1861.

General WILLIAM S. HARNEY, U. S. Army, Commanding Department of the West.

SIR: In accordance with the laws of the State of Missouri which have been existing for some years and in obedience to the orders of the governor, on Monday last* I entered into an encampment with the militia force of Saint Louis County for the purpose of instructing the same in accordance with the laws of the United States and of this State. Every officer and soldier in my command had taken with uplifted hand the following oath, to wit:

You, each and every one of you, do solemnly swear that you will honestly and faithfully serve the State of Missouri against all her enemies, and that you will do your utmost to sustain the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State against all violence of whatsoever kind or description; and you do further swear that you will well and truly execute and obey the legal orders of all officers properly placed over you whilst on duty, so help you God.

Whilst in the peaceable performance of the duties devolved upon me and my command under these laws, my encampment was yesterday surrounded by an overwhelming force of armed men, acting under the command of Capt. N. Lyon, Second Infantry, U. S. Army, and called upon by him through a written command accompanying this. To which communication I replied in the following terms, to wit:

CAMP JACKSON, MO., May 10, 1861.

Capt. N. LYON, Commanding U. S. Troops.

SIR: I never for a moment having conceived the idea that so illegal and unconstitutional a demand as I have just received from you would be made by an officer of the U. S. Army I am wholly unprepared to defend my command from this unwarranted attack, and shall therefore be forced to comply with your demand.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

D. M. FROST, Brigadier-General, Commanding Camp Jackson, Missouri Vol. Militia.

My command was in accordance with the above deprived of their arms and surrendered into the hands of Captain Lyon. After which, whilst thus disarmed and surrounded, a fire was opened upon a portion

* Monday, May 6, 1861. {p.114} of it by his troops and a number of my men put to death, together with several innocent lookers-on-men, women and children. My command was then marched as prisoners of war in triumph to this place. I am now informed, as I was at the time of the surrender, by the captain that my command may be released upon the officers and men giving their parole “not to take up arms or to serve in a military capacity against the United States during the present civil war.”

Against the whole proceeding of Captain Lyon as well as against the terms of release I most earnestly protest, for the following reasons:

That in addition to the obligation of loyalty which rests upon every citizen every man of my command now held as a prisoner has voluntarily taken an oath to sustain the Constitution and laws of the United States.

That when my camp was attacked in this unwarrantable manner and during the previous days of its existence the only flags that floated there were those of the United States with all the stars and its fellow bearing alone the coat of arms of the State of Missouri.

That in addition to all this on the morning before this attack was made I addressed to Captain Lyon a communication, informing him of the proffer of services I had previously made of myself and of all my command, and if necessary the whole power of the State of Missouri, to protect the U. S. property, and assuring him that I had in no respect changed those views or opinions, either of my own volition or through any orders emanating from my constitutional commander.

Under all these circumstances I appeal to you as the chief representative of the United States in this department for justice on behalf of those loyal citizens who are now held as prisoners of war, captured under and marching to their place of confinement with the flag of the Union flying over their heads. I ask that you will not put upon the command the additional indignity of requiring us to give our parole when we have already given our oath in support of the Constitution, but that you will order our restoration to the liberties of which we have been illegally deprived, as well as of the property of the State and individuals, as the larger portion of the equipments have been purchased with the private funds of the individuals of my command, both officers and men.

I trust that such as have been so purchased will at least be restored to the proper owners.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

D. M. FROST, Brigadier-General, Missouri Volunteer Militia.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE WEST, Saint Louis, Mo., May 18, 1861.

Lieut. Col. E. D. TOWNSEND, Asst. Adjt. Gen., Hdqrs. of the Army, Washington.

SIR: I have the honor to report that on the 14th instant a writ of habeas corpus was served on me requiring me to bring before Judge Treat, judge of the U. S. court, eastern district of Missouri, Capt. Emmett MacDonald, one of the officers captured at Camp Jackson, near this city, May 10, by the U. S. forces, under the command of Capt. N. Lyon, Second Infantry.

{p.115}

Captain MacDonald declined to give his parole, and has, therefore, been retained as a prisoner of war. He was transferred on the 13th instant to the custody of the officer commanding the Illinois troops at Caseyville, Ill., some ten miles from Saint Louis. I transmit herewith a copy of my answer to the writ of habeas corpus.

The case has been postponed until Monday next, when it will come up before the U. S. court at its regular session.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

WM. S. HARNEY, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

SAINT LOUIS, May 15, 1861.

Hon. Judge TREAT, Judge of the U. S. Court, Eastern District:

In response to the writ of habeas corpus yesterday served on me commanding me to bring before his honor one Emmett MacDonald, I have to say that Mr. MacDonald, the person described in the writ, is not imprisoned or kept in confinement by me, nor is he under my control or command, nor has he been imprisoned or confined or so under my control or command at or since the issuing of this writ.

In making this return to the writ of habeas corpus issued by you commanding me to produce the body of Emmett MacDonald, and in making my response to the same I avail myself of the opportunity thus presented to express my profound regret of the state of things existing in this community. I declare my wish to sustain the Constitution and laws of the United States and of the State of Missouri. But while making this declaration I find myself in such a position that in deciding upon a particular case I must take to what I am compelled to regard as the higher law, even by so doing my conduct shall have the appearance of coming in conflict with the forms of law.

With respect to the transaction which took place at Camp Jackson near this city on the 10th instant I have to say that it happened prior to my arrival here and before my assumption of the command of this department. While I am not therefore responsible for the proceedings at that camp, and under ordinary circumstances should not feel at liberty to comment upon them officially, I am not disposed in the existing state of things to shrink from the responsibility of acknowledging that my predecessor in command saw in the proclamation of the President of the United States ordering the dispersion of all armed rebels hostile to the United States, as described in the proclamation, a high and imperative duty imposed upon him with respect to the camp in question, the evidences of its treasonable purposes having been to his mind indisputably clear. His action in the premises I recognize therefore as imposing upon me the obligation of assuming the consequences of his proceedings so far as to abstain from pursuing any course which, by implication, might throw a doubt upon the sufficiency of his authority.

Upon looking into the circumstances attending the detention of Emmett MacDonald I find they are such if I had him in charge that I could not give orders that might set him at large, unless some sufficient evidence should be furnished that he was not of the number of those in Camp Jackson who gave to that camp its character by which it came under the class of disaffected men hostile to the Government of {p.116} the United States, according to the terms of the proclamation referred to. For this purpose nothing has been required of these persons but a simple pledge or parole of honor.

The whole subject will be referred by me to the Government of the United States, whose instructions to me at this critical time are paramount.

W. S. HARNEY, Brigadier-General U. S. Army.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 15th day of May, 1861.

JOSHUA W. BOURNE, Notary Public.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI VOLUNTEERS, Saint Louis Arsenal, May 26, 1861.

Capt. S. WILLIAMS, Assistant Adjutant-General, Saint Louis.

SIR: I have the honor to report that the prisoners taken at Camp Jackson and sent to the city upon the steam-boat Isabella after their release were as follows: Officers-brigade staff, 6; Radford’s artillery, 4; First Infantry and Jackson’s artillery, 33; Second Infantry, 29; battalion infantry, 4; total, 79. Men-590. Aggregate, 669.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. LYON, Brigadier-General of Volunteers, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, November 23, 1861.

Capt. WILLIAM MCMICHAEL, Assistant Adjutant-General, Department of the Missouri.

SIR: I inclose herewith a remarkable document presented at our out-guards to-day by Captain George of the rebel army. Captain George is permitted to go to Saint Louis as a prisoner on parole to report to the general commanding the department for his decision.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

P. S.-Captain George since my writing the above states that he is not nor has he been in the Confederate Army. He was a Camp Jackson prisoner since which he has not taken up arms. He now simply claims the right under the Price-Frémont exchanger to return to his family in Saint Louis and should he desire to do so to join General Price and the Missouri State troops.

U. S. G.

[Inclosure.]

HEADQUARTERS FIRST DIVISION, WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Columbus, Ky., November 20, 1861.

Capt. James George and Lieut. Henry Guibor, late prisoners of war, and duly exchanged by agreement between Major-General Frémont, {p.117} U. S. Army, and Major-General Price, of the Missouri State troops, as appears to me, now therefore I grant said officers (Captain George and-Lieutenant Guibor) this safeguard to pass the picket-lines and videttes of this army on their return to Saint Louis and back to this place.

By order of Brigadier-General Pillow, commanding:

GUS. A. HENRY, JR., Assistant Adjutant-General.

* See papers relating to “Frémont-Price Convention,” etc., post.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, November 25, 1861.

Capt. WILLIAM MCMICHAEL, Saint Louis, Mo.:

Last evening a party of prisoners taken at Camp Jackson arrived here on the steamer Platte Valley. I had them detained on the steamer until this morning, when they were put aboard of one of the ferries and landed at Norfolk, Mo., about five miles below. These prisoners are coming in squads from day to day, and necessarily keep the enemy well informed of all our movements it is possible for the community at large to know as well as the secret plottings of the enemy in our midst. I would again report to the commanding officer of this department the almost certain disloyalty of the entire boating interest plying between Saint Louis and this place. I am informed that the owners of the packets complained of are generally enemies to the Government and their acts prove conclusively that the crews employed are.

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General.

–––

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIST., MISSOURI STATE GUARDS, Camp New Madrid, November 25, 1861.

Brig. Gen. U. S. GRANT, U. S. Army.

GENERAL: The bearer of this, Maj. James R. Shaler, was and is major of the Second Regiment of the Missouri Volunteer Militia, and was one of the Camp Jackson prisoners and is one of the Southerners included in the treaty between Generals Frémont and Price. We hear that these gentlemen are allowed to visit Saint Louis for the purpose of reporting themselves to be regularly exchanged. If you understand the matter in this way you will please allow Major Shaler to pass to Saint Louis and if not you will please let him return. Major Shaler is now in no way connected with the Missouri State Guard or C. S. Army nor has he been.

Yours, most respectfully,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, November 26, 1861.

Brig. Gen. U. S. GRANT, Cairo, Ill.:

Your letter of the 23d instant with inclosed safeguard to Captain George and Lieutenant Guibor purporting to have been signed by order of General Pillow has been received. I am directed by the commanding {p.118} general of this department to say that you did very wrong in permitting these officers to pass your lines under the authority of such a paper. Any person hereafter attempting to pass with such a document will be immediately arrested and the case reported to these headquarters for instructions.

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, November 26, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Asst. Adjt. Gen., Dept. of the Missouri, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: One more of the Camp Jackson exchanged prisoners has arrived here this evening on his way South. I have determined to retain him and all others arriving in small squads until the whole of them are here and discharge them together. I respectfully submit this plan for the approval of the general commanding the department.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL, Saint Louis, Mo., November 26, 1861.

Capt. WILLIAM MCMICHAEL, Assistant Adjutant-General.

SIR: I beg leave respectfully to call the attention of the commanding general to the following facts: Several of the prisoners taken at Camp Jackson near this city May 10, 1861, and who have been recently exchanged but who were within the lines of the Confederate Army at the time the exchange was made have returned to this city nominally for the purpose of receiving in person the certificate of exchange, but really I have reason to believe to arrange private business and convey information and assistance to the enemy. Two persons both of whom have been in the Confederate Army were arrested in this city before their certificates of exchange were delivered. I have information that several more are coming.

I have been applied to for the release of those under arrest, but have refused upon the ground that those who were at the time of the exchange already within the lines of the Confederate Army had no right whatever to come to this city. Their presence is not necessary to complete the exchange, and the certificates which are merely the evidence of the exchange can be forwarded by the commissioners who represent the Confederate Army in the negotiations. As it may be some days or weeks before this matter is finally disposed of I would respectfully ask of the commanding general an instruction upon this point.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

GEO. E. LEIGHTON, Provost-Marshal.

{p.119}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, November 28, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Asst. Adjt. Gen., Dept. of the Missouri, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: Yours of the 26th instant in relation to Captain George’s return to Saint Louis is received. Captain George was arrested by the picket to whom he presented himself and as a prisoner was brought before me. Being a commissioned officer I confined him during his few hours’ stay here to the hotel on his own word not to leave it and sent him a prisoner to report to the general commanding the department for his decision. Although the terms of the exchange of prisoners entered into between Generals Frémont and Price would authorize the passage of Camp Jackson prisoners to the army to which they might belong I did not interpret it as authority for them to return from the South to visit their friends and then pass our lines again. The matter was simply referred to the general commanding the department and the prisoner, a commissioned officer, sent to Saint Louis on his parole. Lieutenant Guibor whose name appears on the pass with Captain George did not accompany him.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, November 29, 1861.

Brig. Gen. U. S. GRANT, Cairo, Ill.:

In answer to your communication of November 26 announcing that you are retaining the Camp Jackson prisoners who arrive in small numbers so that they may be sent to the enemy in large bodies the commanding general directs me to say that he approves of your action in this matter.

WM. MCMICHAEL, Assistant Adjutant. General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, November 30, 1861.

Brig. Gen. SAMUEL R. CURTIS, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: With a view to the settlement of the question which I submitted to you as a precedent for the future by the major-general commanding the Western Department I respectfully ask that transportation from Saint Louis to Sedalia and beyond the Federal lines may be furnished to the prisoners of war who were taken at Camp Jackson May 10, 1861, and who have recently been released from parole. The number will be sixty including General D. M. Frost and staff, and by railroad will require one passenger-car and one baggage-car. They will be ready to leave on to-morrow morning.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

HENRY W. WILLIAMS.

(In behalf of Camp Jackson prisoners.)

{p.120}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, December 13, 1861.

Major-General POLK, Commanding, Columbus, Ky.

GENERAL: Mr. H. B. Belt, of Saint Louis, is here with the releases for Camp Jackson prisoners at Columbus which I promised you should be procured and forwarded. The department commander at Saint Louis does not construe the agreement between Generals Frémont and Price as making provision for the transportation and delivery of “side-arms and equipments of officers and personal property of privates” to paroled prisoners who had previously gone beyond our lines and into the enemy’s service, and therefore will permit nothing to be sent except the releases.

I send Captain Hillyer, my aide-de-camp, accompanied by Mr. Belt under a flag of truce to deliver to you the releases.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army, By W. S. HILLYER, Aide-de-Camp.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 14, 1861.

A. GLASSCOCK.

SIR: In answer to your communication of December 10* Major-General Halleck directs me to say that should you attempt to return to the rebel army without being duly exchanged and having a pass to that effect you will if captured be shot for violating your parole of honor. Brigadier-General Curtis, U. S. Army (headquarters Saint Louis), has charge of the exchange of prisoners taken at Camp Jackson but no arrangement has yet been made for a general exchange.

WILLIAM MCMICHAEL, Assistant Adjutant-General.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, December 17, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Saint Louis, Mo.:

On the strength of a telegraphic dispatch received from Saint Louis that the prisoners arriving here yesterday were impostors I have ordered them back to Saint Louis. Eight of these prisoners did not claim to have been taken at Camp Jackson and had with them regular certificates of exchange. As I am anxious to make as few shipments of these men as possible and as there was nothing in my telegraphic instructions to prevent it I returned these also.

...

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General.

{p.121}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., December 19, 1861.

Brig. Gen. U. S. GRANT, Cairo, Ill.:

By what authority did you send back exchanged prisoners? They are not under assumed names. All were identified here before exchange.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 19, 1861.

Brig. Gen. U. S. GRANT, Cairo, Ill.:

No such man as W. H. Bud, colonel, known at these headquarters. It is most extraordinary that you should have obeyed a telegram sent by an unknown person and not even purporting to have been given by authority. The prisoners will be immediately retained to Cairo.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, December 20, 1861.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, U. S. Army, Commanding Department of the Missouri, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: Your second dispatch saying “It is most extraordinary that you should have obeyed a telegram sent by an unknown person and not even purporting to have been given by authority” is received. In justice to myself I must reply to this telegram. In the first place I never thought of doubting the authority of a telegram received from Saint Louis, supposing that in military matters the telegraph was under such surveillance that no military order could be passed over the wires that was not by authority; second, the signature to the telegram was made with so many flourishes that I could not make it out at all and to send a copy to your headquarters was obliged to send to the office here for a duplicate; third, before this telegram was received Captain Livingston who came in charge of these prisoners reported to me that several who were to come had proven to be impostors and that he had reason to believe that two of those still with him were under assumed names; fourth, directions sufficient to detain prisoners (Camp Jackson exchanged prisoners) might come from the provost-marshal’s office, from General Curtis or from headquarters, and I do not know the employés of the former nor the staff of the latter. The fact is I never dreamed of so serious a telegraphic hoax emanating through a large and responsible office like that in Saint Louis. Inclosed I send you copy of the dispatch received.

I am, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

SAINT LOUIS, December 15, 1861..

General GRANT:

The D. G. Taylor left here at 1 p.m. to-day. Stop her and send back all the Camp Jackson men. They all have assumed names.

W. H. BUEL, Colonel.

{p.122}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 20, 1861.

Brig. Gen. U. S. GRANT, Cairo, Ill.:

The person who sent the telegram about the prisoners has been discovered and placed in confinement. He has no authority whatever. You will hereafter be more careful about obeying telegrams from private persons countermanding orders from these headquarters.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, December 22, 1861.

General L. POLK:

I send you under flag of truce some seventeen of the Camp Jackson prisoners who are released under the Frémont-Price agreement. These prisoners were brought here on Tuesday last, and would have been immediately forwarded to Columbus but that a dispatch was sent to me purporting to be official stating that they were impostors and were not the men they assumed to be. In consequence of this dispatch I arrested the parties here and put them at labor for a few hours and then sent them back to Saint Louis. It turned out, however, that the dispatch was a wicked hoax perpetrated by an individual in Saint Louis who has been arrested and will be properly punished. No one regrets the occurrence more than I do. Colonel Webster has charge of the expedition and will receive any communication you may desire to send me.

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, March 14, 1862.

Col. J. C. KELTON, Asst. Adjt. Gen., Hdqrs. Dept. of the Missouri, Saint Louis, Mo.

COLONEL: I have the honor of submitting my report concerning the exchanges of Camp Jackson and Lexington prisoners. Said exchanges were made in pursuance of an agreement between Maj. Gen. John C. Frémont, commanding the U. S. forces in this department, and General Sterling Price, commanding the rebel forces (styled Missouri State Guard), made on the 26th day of October, 1861. Said agreement authorized and ordered the exchange of certain officers and privates therein named and other privates to the number of 530, captured by the U. S. forces under command of General N. Lyon at Camp Jackson, Mo., May 10, 1861, for certain officers and privates therein named and other privates to the number of 530, captured by the rebel force (denominated Missouri State Guard) under the command of General Sterling Price at Lexington, Mo., September 20, 1861.

On the part of the rebels were named as commissioners to effect said exchange Col. S. B. Churchill, Col. D. H. Armstrong, Col. J. R. Barrett, Maj. H. W. Williams and D. R. Barclay, esq., all residents of Saint Louis, appointed by General Sterling Price. On the part of the United States General S. R. Curtis, commandant of this military district, appointed Col. John A. Gurley, commissioner. Colonel Gurley being compelled to repair to Washington to take his seat in Congress General {p.123} Curtis requested me to act as commissioner and at my request detailed Lieut. L. J. Barnes to render me any assistance I might require.

As the number to be exchanged of the Lexington prisoners was limited to a portion of the whole and all being on parole I decided to exchange only those who signified their intention to re-enlist for service. Much delay and labor ensued in getting the names from the recruiting officers scattered in various portions of the country. Were it not from such delay this report would have been made much earlier. The full number authorized has not yet been reached, but I cannot procure further lists of prisoners re-enlisted and therefore hand in my report.

We have exchanged-

Rebels.United states.
 
General1forColonels3
Colonel1Lieutenant-colonels2
Majors6Majors2
Captains24Captains27
Lieutenants57Lieutenants60
Privates399Privates448
Surgeon1Surgeon1
Total489Total543
 

The above gives the United States an excess in the exchange occasioned by the fact that only 489 officers and privates of the Camp Jackson prisoners were found desirous of joining their fortunes with secession and General Price. Yet I am informed unofficially through good authority that many of the prisoners at Camp Jackson are in the rebel army yet without exchanges, and a majority of those now in the army violated parole before exchanging. With the report you have memorandum marked A,* giving a complete list of exchanges on both sides with rank.

D. R. Barclay, the rebel commissioner, has attended principally to the exchanges and I hereby take occasion to mention the uniform courtesy and liberality toward me he has evinced in transacting the exchanges.

I am, colonel, respectfully, &c.,

CHAS. H. HOWLAND, Commissioner of Exchanges.

* Not found.

–––

Miscellaneous Captures; Treatment of Political and Military Prisoners, and Tentative Efforts at Exchange.

SAINT LOUIS ARSENAL, May 16, 1861.

Capt. S. WILLIAMS, Asst. Adjt. Gen., Hdqrs. Dept. of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: In consequence of the frequent arrivals at this place of persons from Potosi complaining of revolting outrages and being driven from their homes because of their loyalty to the General Government I caused a party to proceed to that place to apprehend offending parties and give consolation and relief to the sufferers. The object seems to have been very judiciously accomplished by Captain Cole, of the Fifth {p.124} Missouri Volunteers, whose report is herewith inclosed.* It will be seen that at De Soto a large secession meeting was defeated and their flag taken by the timely arrival of Captain Cole. A list of the prisoners detained and against whom most palpable evidence is understood to exist of persevering and systematic cruelty toward the friends of the Government is herewith inclosed.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. LYON, Captain, Second Infantry, Commanding.

* See Series I, Vol. III, p. 10, for Cole’s report.

[Inclosure.]

List of prisoners taken May 16, 1861.

John Wiatt, Jefferson County; N. B. Buck, S. T. Dunklin, L. W. Casy, Joseph Dunklin, W. A. Mathews, George B. Clark, Patrick Doil, H. S. Cater, and Edward Willoughby, Potosi, Washington County; D. S. Smith, Jefferson County.

[Sub-inclosure.]

Captain COLE, Commander U. S. Troops at Potosi, Washington County, Mo.:

The undersigned petitioners, residents of the town of Potosi and County of Washington, would respectfully represent that they believe that in their present disorganized condition and without arms their lives and property would be in danger unless you should leave a company of U. S. troops stationed at said town until they can be organized and armed. They would respectfully represent that they are and have been loyal to the United States Government and acknowledge their allegiance to the same and are willing to submit to her laws and regulations. They state they will use all necessary efforts to organize and arm in conformity to the laws of the United States and the usages of her army at the earliest possible period.

[Signed by fifty citizens.]

–––

SPRINGFIELD, MO., July 11, 1861.

Col. F. SIGEL.

SIR: In accordance with your order I most respectfully make hereby a statement of facts concerning the surrender of myself and men at Neosho July 5, 1861:

After you had left Neosho on the 4th day of July I observed that the city was very unquiet. I took all necessary precautions by placing extra sentinels and sending out patrols every half hour day and night. The Fourth passed off quietly.

On the 5th day of July the same precaution was taken. About 11 o’clock I heard the cannonading, whereon I immediately dispatched a patrol of twenty men under the command of Lieutenant Damde to inquire if possible the cause of it. At 1 o’clock I received orders signed by Brigade Quartermaster Richardson to retreat with my command if necessary. Lieutenant Damde with his patrol returned about the same time. They had scarcely returned-in fact had not been in camp more than ten minutes-before the enemy came pouring in in all {p.125} directions to the number of about 1,200 to 1,500 men under the command of Colonel Churchill and Major McIntosh (Arkansas Rangers). Finding it impossible for me to hold my post with success, after due deliberation-after due consultation with my officers and men-I concluded it would be best to make the surrender as it was required-namely unconditionally. We were after the surrender of our arms placed in the court-house where we remained until Monday, the 8th.

I must mention here that the officers of the Arkansas Rangers as well as of the Missouri troops behaved themselves quietly, accommodatingly and friendly both towards myself and men; but their privates on the contrary in a most insulting and brutal manner.

On the 8th we were released, we officers having before given our parole of honor not to serve any more against the Confederate States of America during the war, my men having before sworn to the same effect. We left Neosho on the evening of the 8th, at 5.30 o’clock, with an escort of about thirty men under the command of Captain Boone for our security and protection, the people of Neosho and farmers of that vicinity having threatened to kill us in the streets. Captain Boone escorted us about four miles from the camp. After innumerable hardships and dangers, without food and water our canteens having all been stolen from us by the Southern troops we at last reached Springfield, my men all broken down having traveled the distance of eighty-five miles in fifty hours with hardly any food at all.

Having made this statement I respectfully place the same in your hands to judge my actions.

Very respectfully, yours,

JOSEPH CONRAD, Captain of Rifle Company B, Third Regt. Missouri [Union] Vols.

–––

SAINT LOUIS ARSENAL, July 30, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

SIR: I would respectfully call the attention of the general commanding the department to the condition of the political prisoners confined here. Officers in command at distant points have been in the habit of arresting persons upon charges of treason and sending them to the arsenal. In all such cases I have called the attention of the U. S. district attorney to the matter but am not aware that any have been indicted. There is no suitable place at the arsenal for prisoners of war; they have to be confined in the prison or else allowed the liberty of the grounds. To confine them is inhuman and to let them mix with the men is likely to produce trouble.

...

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHESTER HARDING, JR., Assistant Adjutant-General of Missouri Volunteers.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, Mo., August 7, 1861.

Col. J. B. WYMAN, Commanding at Rolla, Mo.

SIR: The general directs me to say he will hold as prisoners those men taken by you bearing arms against the United States; others {p.126} the charges against whom are not more serious than entertaining secession feelings he has discharged. The arms and prisoners taken, if the men were apprehended while constituting an armed body, will be detained; all others will be restored to their rightful owners.

...

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[J. C. KELTON,] Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, Mo., August 7, 1861.

Col. J. B. WYMAN, Commanding at Rolla, Mo.

SIR: The prisoners you sent to the arsenal a few days since have been discharged. The offenses against the majority were of too trivial a character to detain them longer.

You are directed to send no more prisoners here unless prisoners of war. It is thought an unnecessary expense in transporting them to the arsenal is contracted and that no good object is effected by their detention. If entertaining secession feelings constitutes a grave offense, one sufficient to imprison a man on, the Government would have two-thirds of the State to feed at its expense.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[J. C. KELTON,] Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS U. S. FORCES, Cape Girardeau August 18, 1861.

Maj. Gen. JOHN C. FRÉMONT, Department of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: ... I have the honor to inclose you a letter from ex-Lieutenant-Governor Reynolds (a copy of which has been sent me); also another from Jeff. Thompson to me containing several threats.

I plead guilty to the charge of having written the note mentioned and would have done as I promised had Captain Price committed the threatened outrages on the peaceable citizens of Commerce. My threats had the desired effect and prevented his doing any act of violence there. I tried hard to get hold of Captain Price and his troop of marauders but they always run even when but half their number of foot soldiers are opposed to them. The young man Price and his brother-in-law who were taken prisoners have been notoriously active in aiding the enemy. Their father, the brother of Captain Price, was the agent for procuring supplies for the New Madrid forces and his mules, servants and family were all engaged in transporting them.

I am happy to learn that the pretended governor of the State disapproves of the proclamation of his commanding general and I shall most certainly endeavor to aid him in carrying on the war according to civilized usage. I can furnish the ex-governor with information which if he means what he writes will keep him steadily engaged for some time in punishing Missouri forces.

...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

C. C. MARSH, Colonel, Commanding Post.

{p.127}

[Inclosure No. 1.]

NEW MADRID, MO., August 15, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT, U. S. Army, Commanding U. S. Forces in Missouri.

SIR: Capt. Charles Price, of the Missouri State Guard, has received a letter from Messrs. B. S. Curd and William M. Price dated Cape Girardeau, August 10, 1861, in which they write: “The colonel says that if you attack Commerce to-night he will hang us.” With this note is another recognized to be in the handwriting of Col. C. C. Marsh and of which the following is an exact copy:

HEADQUARTERS U. S. FORCES, Cape Girardeau, August 10, 1861.

SIR: Your relatives have written you the above note. It is true. If you injure the people of Commerce or their property I will hang them and take a bitter revenge on you in other respects.

C. C. MARSH, Colonel, Commanding U. S. Forces, Cape Girardeau.

The gentlemen held by Colonel Marsh are as I am credibly informed citizens of this State and unconnected in any way with military operations. Even were they so connected in a manner justifying their being made prisoners of war the Articles of War and Army Regulations of the United States require humane treatment of prisoners.

I also learn that the detachment of Colonel Marsh’s troops which captured Mr. William M. Price wantonly burned his father’s warehouse and took away a large quantity of corn and sixty mules. Similar outrages are believed to have been very lately committed at the farm of General N. W. Watkins near Cape Girardeau, and also by Colonel Marsh’s troops. I therefore in the interest of humanity lay these matters before you and request a frank answer to these inquiries:

Does this conduct of Colonel Marsh and his troops meet your approval? If not what steps do you propose to take in respect to the guilty parties and in order to prevent the repetition of such conduct?

It is the desire of the Missouri State authorities to conduct the present war according to civilized usages and any departure from them by Missouri forces will be properly punished by their officers if aware of it. I deem it proper to add that on seeing Colonel Marsh’s letter I immediately instructed the general commanding the Missouri State Guard in this district to hold in close custody a number of prisoners recently taken by him and belonging to your forces. Should Colonel Marsh’s future treatment of Messrs. Curd and Price necessitate the hanging of any of those prisoners in retaliation I am content that impartial men shall judge who is morally responsible for their melancholy fate.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

THOS. C. REYNOLDS, Acting Governor of Missouri.

[Inclosure No. 2.]

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIV., MISSOURI STATE GUARD, Camp Sikeston, August 17, 1861.

Col. C. C. MARSH, Commanding U. S. Forces, Cape Girardeau, Mo.

SIR: I send Edmund Burke, a citizen of Scott County, as bearer of letters from Governor T. C. Reynolds to General Frémont and yourself. {p.128} Governor Reynolds has sent me a copy of these letters and I will take it upon myself to remark in addition to the letters of Governor Reynolds that whenever such threats are used as that which is believed to have been uttered by you in the letter referred to or that whenever any such threats are carried into execution I will retaliate to the utmost of my ability.

Yours, &c.,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE WEST, Rolla Mo., August 18, 1861.

ADJUTANT-GENERAL, Head quarters Department of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: Mr. Emmett MacDonald, a messenger from the rebel army, is now here with a view to making an arrangement for the exchange of prisoners. They have many more of our men than we have of theirs and propose a mutual liberation which I will agree to unless orders are received from the commanding general to the contrary.

Mr. MacDonald is anxious to visit Saint Louis for a day. To this request I have not acceded but will thank you to lay the matter before the commanding general that he may consider it and authorize him or not as he may deem best to visit Saint Louis.

I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,

S. D. STURGIS, Major First Cavalry, Commanding.

–––

OFFICE PROVOST-MARSHAL, Saint Louis, Mo., August 21, 1861.

Lieut. Col. S. BURBANK, U. S. Army, Commanding Arsenal.

COLONEL: The major-general commanding directs that Mr. Brownlee, now a prisoner in charge of your guard, be released from confinement and allowed to leave the arsenal on the following conditions:

First. That he resign his commission as president of the board of police commissioners.

Second. That he sign a pledge to leave the city to remain in some of the free States and not return here without the consent of the military authorities of the Government.

The foregoing conditions must be complied with and the necessary papers put into your possession for transmittal to this office before Mr. Brownlee is released.

I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. MCKINSTRY, Major, U. S. Army, Provost-Marshal.

–––

HEADQUARTERS KANSAS BRIGADE, Kansas City, Mo., September 1, 1861.

Major-General PRICE, Commanding Missouri State Guard.

SIR: I am instructed by General James H. Lane, commanding Kansas Brigade, to say that he is willing to exchange Henry N. Rosser and Michael McCarty, prisoners in his hands, for any two commissioned {p.129} officers of his brigade now in your hands. You can send them to this city and on their arrival I will immediately discharge and send under proper safeguards the two prisoners above named.

I send this message by Lieut. Thomas W. Scudder, of my command, whom I will expect to have treated as a gentleman and soldier.

Respectfully,

THOS. J. ANDERSON, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

CAMP CAVENDER, Saint Louis, September 7, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, U. S. Army, A. A. G., Western Department.

CAPTAIN: I have the honor to ask what disposition is to be made of our men who were taken prisoners at Springfield and released on parole? I have been informed though not officially that an exchange has been made which absolves them from their parole. Please inform me if this is so.

I am, captain, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Major First Missouri Volunteers.

[Indorsement.]

SAINT LOUIS, MO., September 7, 1861.

The exchange referred to within was accomplished by Mr. MacDonald on the part of the rebel forces and myself on the part of the Government verbally. I declined to enter into negotiations of any other kind. The exchange was to be equal and without the imposing of any restraint upon the prisoners of either side, and I have no doubt but when the rebel forces learn of their prisoners having been released without parole they will consider ours as absolved also.

S. D. STURGIS, Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers.

–––

U. S. MARSHAL’S OFFICE, Springfield, ill., September 8, 1861.

Maj. Gen. J. C. FRÉMONT, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: The undersigned desires your order to arrest and deliver to you in the city of Saint Louis Hon. James C. Robinson, member of Congress from the Seventh Congressional district in Illinois.

Robinson is notoriously opposed to the war, the administration and all who are connected with it and busily engaged in making the most treasonable speeches that can be made. He is not without influence and sympathizers and if permitted to remain at large he will cause much trouble. He is suspected of holding communication with the rebels and boasts of his sympathy for the cause of treason. If you will issue an order directed to me at this city I will deliver him into your hands in a few days.

Yours, respectfully,

D. L. PHILLIPS, U. S. Marshal.

We indorse this.

RICHARD YATES, Governor. WM. BUTLER, State Treasurer.

{p.130}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, September 9, 1861.

Maj. J. M. SCHOFIELD, First Missouri Volunteers.

SIR: Your letter of the 7th instant relative to the status of soldiers who were taken prisoners and released on parole has had the attention of the major-general commanding. He has decided under the circumstances of facts indorsed on your letter by Brigadier-General Sturgis that the men are to be considered released from their parole, and directs that you furnish each of them with a certificate representing their release from parole oath for the reasons set forth by General Sturgis; then order them to duty.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. H. EATON, Major, U. S. Army, and Military Secretary.

–––

HEADQUARTERS BRIGADE, Camp Cairo, September 17, 1861.

General U. S. GRANT, Commanding District of Southeast Missouri.

SIR: Having just closed the investigation of the cases of the steamers John Gault and Jefferson seized by the gun-boat Conestoga, under command of Commodore Rodgers, and the prisoners taken on said boats I have the honor to report that I have released all the prisoners taken on the above-named steamers (twenty-five white persons) upon their parole of honor, and seven colored persons who were cooks and cabin servants on the steamer John Gault. I could find no evidence whatever which would warrant me in detaining them as prisoners. I have also examined into the cause assigned for the seizure of the steamer John Gault and can see no reason why she should be longer detained. The evidence shows that the boat was engaged in legitimate business; that all her papers were properly certified by the surveyors of the ports of Louisville, Ky., and Evansville, Ind., and covered an authority to her to transport such articles as she had been carrying. I might further add that the evidence shows that the boat has not been beyond the Kentucky line since the vote upon the question of secession was taken in the State of Tennessee. I would therefore recommend a release of the steamer John Gault and that she be chartered for Government use.

As far as relates to the steamer Jefferson the captain and clerk were not on board at the time she was seized. I will make the case of the Jefferson and her cargo the subject of a future report.

Yours, &c.,

JOHN A. MCCLERNAND, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

BROOKFIELD, September 22, 1861.

Maj. Gen. JOHN C. FRÉMONT:

I have just arrived here from Quincy and have 100 of our men that were in the battle at Lexington; 2,000 more are at Hamilton, fifty miles west of this. Colonel Mulligan surrendered 4 p.m. Friday. Water cut off. The entire command after surrendering were disarmed; non-commissioned officers and privates sworn and released; commissioned officers are held as prisoners. Federal loss 39 killed and 120 {p.131} wounded; rebel 1,400 killed and wounded. I send provisions forward to our gallant soldiers who have not been fed for two days. They were not re-enforced.

B. M. PRENTISS, Brigadier-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, September 23, 1861.

Hon. S. CAMERON, Secretary of War:

Nothing since my dispatch of this morning. Our loss 39 killed, 120 wounded; loss of enemy 1,400 killed and wounded. Our non-commissioned officers and privates sworn and released; commissioned officers held as prisoners. Our troops are gathering around the enemy. I will send you from the field more details in a few days.

JNO. C. FRÉMONT, Major-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, September 23, 1861.

Brig. Gen. B. M. PRENTISS, Quincy, Ill.

GENERAL: Your dispatch received. The surgeons of my staff and the sanitary commission are directed to communicate with you in regard to the wounded. Keep me fully informed of facts in relation to them so that their wants may be provided for as promptly as possible.

J. C. FRÉMONT, Major-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, September 24, 1861.

General PRICE, Commanding Missouri State Guard, Lexington, Mo.

GENERAL: I am instructed by Major-General Frémont to say in reply to your proposal for the exchange of Col. Thomas A. Marshall, First Regiment Illinois Cavalry, for Mr. Prince L. Hudgins that it is accepted and the latter will be released and delivered over to his son, the bearer of your letter. Please on receipt of this give to Colonel Marshall facilities for reaching the nearest station of our troops.

Respectfully, sir, your obedient servant,

J. H. EATON, Colonel and Military Secretary.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, September 24, 1861.

Capt. G. GRANGER, U. S. Army, Commanding Officer, Saint Louis Arsenal.

SIR: Deliver to the bearer to be placed in his custody Mr. Prince L. Hudgins, detained as a prisoner in the arsenal. He is released by order of Major-General Frémont, having been exchanged on an arrangement with General Price for Col. Thomas A. Marshall, First Regiment Illinois Cavalry.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. H. EATON, Colonel and Military Secretary.

{p.132}

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE GUARD, Lexington, Mo., September 24, 1861.

General JAMES H. LANE, U. S. Army.

SIR: I am instructed by Maj. Gen. S. Price, commanding Missouri State forces, to say that he is willing to exchange two of the U. S. officers now prisoners of war for Henry N. Rosser and Michael McCarty, prisoners in your hands.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

HENRY LITTLE, Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS THIRD DIVISION, Sedalia, September 29, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT, Commanding Army of the West.

GENERAL: The bearer of these lines, Major Tyler, who was captured at Lexington and released since on parole, is a graduate of the Military Academy of Virginia. He wishes to be exchanged as soon as possible if such measure will be taken, and I take the liberty of recommending him to your favorable consideration.

I am, general, your most obedient servant,

F. SIGEL, Brigadier-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, U. S. ARMY, Camp Lillie, Jefferson City, September 30, 1861.

Maj. Gen. STERLING PRICE, Commanding Missouri State Guard.

SIR: An order has been received at these headquarters signed by Brigadier-General Harris, Missouri State Guard, exchanging Lieut. Edwin Moore, First Regiment Missouri Volunteers, for Captain Blackford, Missouri State Guard. I am directed by Major-General Frémont to inform you that as the proposal is not grade for grade he declines to approve this exchange.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. H. EATON, Colonel and Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

[JEFFERSON CITY], September 30, 1861.

Maj. Gen. STERLING PRICE, Commanding Missouri State Guard.

SIR: I am directed by Major-General Frémont to propose to you the exchange of Lieut. Col. John Knapp, prisoner of war now at Saint Louis, for Lieutenant-Colonel Thacher, U. S. Volunteers. If this meets with your approval please notify me at once.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. H. EATON, Colonel and Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

{p.133}

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Kansas City, September 30, 1861.

ASSISTANT ADJUTANT-GENERAL, Headquarters Western Department, Saint Louts, Mo.

SIR: I would respectfully ask some information in regard to the disposition to be made of prisoners released by the rebel forces. I am aware that the subject is one which has occupied the attention of the Government but am not aware that any conclusion has been arrived at in regard to their disposition. At the present time I find myself somewhat embarrassed by the great number of prisoners returning from Lexington, Mo., and especially so in regard to the officers. Two or rather one application has been made to me by General Price and one to General Lane on the subject of the exchange of officers. In the case of the proposed exchange with General Lane I have referred the matter to him, but in regard to the proposed exchange for an officer of the rebel forces who is now here I have postponed any action until I will have received some information on the subject from higher authority.

I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant,

S. D. STURGIS, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

CHILLICOTHE, MO., October 1, 1861.

Capt. CHAUNCEY MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: Your polite communication of September 25 is just received. Your instructions in regard to military prisoners have been anticipated and acted upon. Those sent by me from Hannibal were sent in accordance with an order from the major-general commanding through his military secretary, Major Eaton. In regard to communications addressed to headquarters I have to say that the one returned by you was written under my direction and signed in my own name as commanding officer of the regiment. The signature of the adjutant was unknown to me and altogether gratuitous, neither adding to nor detracting from the import of the communication. I return the papers and letter addressed to Governor Robinson as you direct and respectfully ask your early attention to the business to which they pertain.

Very respectfully,

O. E. LEARNARD, Lieutenant-Colonel, Comdg. First Regiment Kansas Volunteers.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, October 4, 1861.

Brig. Gen. S. R. CURTIS, Commanding, &c., Benton Barracks.

SIR: In obedience to General Orders, No. 69, War Department, Adjutant-General’s Office, dated Washington, August 28, 1861, the major-general commanding directs that you discharge from the service forthwith all enlisted men in the volunteer service under your command who have been taken prisoners by the enemy and released on parole.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHAUNCEY MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General.

{p.134}

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, October 10, 1861.

Brig. Gen. S. D. STURGIS, Commanding, &c, Kansas City.

SIR: In reply to yours of the 30th ultimo I have to state that you will at once order an officer to muster out of the service all enlisted men (volunteers) who have been taken prisoners by the rebels and released on parole. You will also exchange as many officers as possible.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHAUNCEY MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, October 11, 1861.

Capt. W. E. PRINCE, First Infantry, Commanding Fort Leavenworth.

SIR: The commanding general directs that you send an officer of your command to Saint Joseph to muster out of the service all the enlisted men that have been taken prisoners by the enemy and released on parole. You will direct the officer to make public in a Saint Joseph newspaper the date and place of mustering out.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHAUNCEY MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, October 16, 1861.

Hon. S. CAMERON.

SIR: There are from 50 to 100 dangerous secessionists in this city. In the event of Federal reverses I think it best to seize and hold them as prisoners. We have no fit place to detain them and it were better that they were out of the State. I would respectfully suggest the occupation of the fort at Mackinac for that purpose. Please advise me by telegraph what are your directions.

JNO. MCNEIL, Colonel Nineteenth Missouri, Assistant Provost-Marshal.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE GUARD, Camp near Greenfield, October 16, 1861.

[General J. H. LANE.]

GENERAL: When at Drywood I captured a number of prisoners belonging to the State of Kansas. I released them all. At Lexington I released a large number, the officers upon parole. Having so done I confidently relied upon your pursuing the same course with regard to citizens of the State of Missouri. You have as prisoners Messrs. Rosser and Harris; also a soldier captured at Drywood. Young Rosser has never been in the ranks of the army in any way. I will give an unconditional release for any Kansas officers you may designate for these or for any others you may have in your command.

I am, general, respectfully,

S. PRICE, Major-General, Commanding.

{p.135}

–––

HEADQUARTERS POST, Rolla, Mo., October 19, 1861.

Capt. C. MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General, Saint Louis, Mo.

CAPTAIN: I have seventy-four prisoners taken at the battle of Henrytown and Linn Creek, all taken in arms. I shall send the commissioned officers forward. What shall I do with the other prisoners? Can I put them to work on the fortifications?

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

G. M. DODGE, Colonel, Commanding Post.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Fort Scott, October 19, 1861.

Brig. Gen. JAMES H. LANE, Commanding Kansas Brigade.

SIR: General Price has made a proposition to exchange prisoners. If it is within the rules of the Government we have some here that might be exchanged to advantage. On Thursday, the 17th instant, the secesh army under Rains, Price and Hunter were seven miles beyond Greenfield on the Springfield road. Humboldt was burned last Monday evening by 331 secesh troops under Talbert, Irwin and Livingstone. I received the news on Tuesday morning and made a movement to cut them off but they were twenty-four hours ahead and crossed on south side of Neosho River in direction of Sherwood. There is a nest in the neighborhood of Preston, Lamar, Sherwood and Carthage that needs attending to. I have scouts in thereto ascertain their whereabouts. They will return to-morrow or next day. If there are any chances of [success] I intend to move against them. If you can spare them I hope you will send us sufficient re-enforcements to make us successful in the attack. If possible we would like to see you here.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

WM. R. JUDSON, Colonel, Commanding Sixth Regiment Kansas Volunteers.

–––

HEADQUARTERS COMMAND, Saint Joseph, October 21, 1861.

Brig. Gen. B. M. PRENTISS, Jefferson City, Mo.

SIR: Captain Thomas, of the Thirteenth Missouri Regiment, Colonel Peabody, will hand you this. He is now a prisoner on parole of honor. We hold one Captain Blatchford of the rebel army prisoner at this station. I would recommend the exchange of Captain Thomas for Captain Blatchford if it can consistently be effected.

Your obedient servant,

R. F. SMITH, Colonel, Commanding Post.

–––

HEADQUARTERS COMMAND, Saint Joseph, October 22, 1861.

Brigadier-General PRENTISS.

SIR: The bearer of this, Captain Thomas, of Colonel Peabody’s (Thirteenth. Missouri) regiment, has captured and brought prisoner to {p.136} this station Lieut. H. Robinson of the rebel army who is now on his parole of honor to appear at Saint Joe on-day of November, 1861. I am exceedingly desirous that an exchange be made of this lieutenant for Lieutenant Moore of our regiment who is now a prisoner of the rebels and on parole of honor. If you can consistently effect the exchange you will much oblige,

Your obedient servant,

R. F. SMITH, Colonel, Commanding Post.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 306.}

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, Mo., October 28, 1861.

...

VI. In pursuance of paragraph II. of General Orders, No. 69, of August 28, 1861, from the War Department, the enlisted men of the Thirty-third Illinois Volunteers taken prisoners at the Big River bridge and released on parole are hereby discharged from the service of the United States to take effect November 1, 1861.

By order of Major-General Frémont:

CHAUNCEY MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 141.}

HEADQUARTERS CAMP FRÉMONT, Cape Girardeau, November 21, 1861.

Capt. Thomas A. Boyd, Company H of the Seventeenth Illinois Volunteers, is ordered to receive into his custody the persons of Capt. William C. Portal, and Thomas H. White and John M. Lyle, clerks of the steamer Platte Valley, and to deliver the said individuals into the custody of the authorities of the U. S. arsenal at Saint Louis, Mo. These parties are sent forward by the order of Brig. Gen. U. S. Grant, commanding District of Southeast Missouri, with general charges to await trial. Captain Boyd will report to Capt. M. M. Warner, provost-marshal, for the reception of said parties and all necessary instructions in regard thereto.

By order of E. P. Wood, lieutenant-colonel Seventeenth Illinois Volunteers:

GEO. P. EDGAR, Captain and Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS POST, Rolla, Mo., November 23, 1861.

Capt. WILLIAM MCMICHAEL, Assistant Adjutant-General.

CAPTAIN: I respectfully request instruction on the following points: I have 150 prisoners at work on the fortifications at this post; they are nearly destitute of clothing, have no blankets and are suffering. Can I issue blankets or clothing to them? There were turned over to me when I took command of this post about forty slaves who were taken from men in the rebel army. What shall I do with them?

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

G. M. DODGE, Colonel, Commanding Post.

{p.137}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 8.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, Mo., November 26, 1861.

...

IV. In all cases where prisoners taken at other posts or in the field are sent to Saint Louis they will be accompanied with a written statement of the charges against them and the evidence upon which the arrest was based. Otherwise prisoners so sent will be released on their arrival here.

V. No person will be hereafter arrested without good and substantial reasons and officers making arrests without sufficient cause or without authority will be held to account and punished. And officers sending prisoners to Saint Louis without charges, proofs or proper explanations will be charged with the expenses of their transportation.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIST., MISSOURI STATE GUARD, Camp New Madrid, November 26, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK, U. S. Army, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: I see by the newspapers that Captain Portal and other officers of the steam-boat Platte Valley were arrested upon their arrival in Cape Girardeau after my having captured that boat. Whatever offenses Captain Portal and officers may have been guilty of before or after said capture I do not know and it was not my business to inquire but as to his having connived at or his having the most remote idea of or complicity in the capture of the boat or the slightest knowledge of my presence at Prior’s Landing prior to his landing there you may rest assured on my honor as a soldier that he is innocent, as are all his crew.

I make this statement as a simple act of justice; and if I was lenient toward the prisoners and forbearing in instructions it was not from any arrangement with Captain Portal or his crew. Lieutenant-Colonel Chappell, one of my aides, the bearer of this, can give you a statement of the facts.

Yours, most respectfully,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, November 27, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK.

SIR: Much interest is felt for the release of Judge James H. Birch, a member of the State convention and staunch active Union man who has been captured and taken to Price’s army. It is proposed to offer for exchange Maj. Uriel Wright who is a secession member of the same body and now as I understand out of prison on parole. He was arrested by the provost-marshal. If the exchange can be arranged it will be useful. I leave the matter to your best judgment.

Your obedient,

H. R. GAMBLE.

{p.138}

–––

WEDNESDAY MORNING, November 27, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK.

SIR: I recommend Col. James H. Birch, jr., and Capt. Thomas B. Biggers as gentlemen suitable to bear a flag of truce to General Price to effect an exchange of Hon. James H. Birch.

Very respectfully,

H. R GAMBLE.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 15.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, November 28, 1861.

...

III. It having been represented to me that persons pretending to act under the authority of Brigadier-General Price, now in arms against the Government of the United States, have seized and taken to General Price’s camp as a prisoner of war Judge James H. Birch of this State, I now therefore appoint James H. Birch, jr., and Thomas B. Biggers commissioners to confer with General Price or any person or persons appointed by him to negotiate for the release of the said Judge James H. Birch if so held a prisoner by order or authority of General Price, and they are authorized to offer in exchange Maj. Uriel Wright now held by us as a prisoner on parole.

If it should become necessary for these commissioners to proceed from one of our posts to any hostile camp in the performance of this duty they will be accompanied by an officer bearing a flag of truce. The officer bearing such flag of truce will proceed according to custom and the laws of war applicable to such cases.

...

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS SECOND DIVISION, Syracuse, December 2, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK:

Doctor Moore, a prominent citizen of this section, desires to go to Price’s camp north of Osceola with letters from Governor Gamble, having in view negotiations for disbanding Price’s forces and their return to allegiance to Government. Shall Doctor Moore be passed through our lines for this purpose? The letter of Governor Gamble states the conditions of immunity for past offenses as defined to him by the President. Price is in a desperate condition and no doubt many of his command if not the larger part of it would avail themselves of such a chance to lay down their arms. Doctor Moore awaits your decision.

[JOHN POPE,] Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers.

–––

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIST., MISSOURI STATE GUARD, New Madrid, December 2, 1861.

Col. J. B. PLUMMER, U. S. Army, Cape Girardeau, Mo.

SIR: Yours of the 26th by Private Lewis T. Wadkins is received. Thu will find inclosed a letter directed to Major-General Halleck upon the subject of an exchange of prisoners and which would have been forwarded sooner but for the want of a proper messenger.

{p.139}

Pending his decision or determination in regard to the matter I cheerfully release Capt. T. J. Larison and Lieut. J. B. Tenney, of the Second Illinois Cavalry, in exchange for McKollard and Frazier and at the same time beg leave to compliment Lieutenant Tenney on his manly and gentlemanly deportment at the time of the capture. I am perfectly satisfied with the exchange for Judge Conrad although I do not know either of the parties exchanged for him.

I make the case of McMillan and Merkle, the spies captured on the Platte Valley, the subject of another letter.

Yours, most respectfully,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIST., MISSOURI STATE GUARD, New Madrid, December 2, 1861.*

Major-General HALLECK, U. S. Army, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: On the 14th day of October at the Big River bridge and Blackwell’s Station on the Iron Mountain Railroad I captured a captain, three lieutenants and fifty odd privates belonging to the Thirty-third Illinois Regiment. On the 19th day of this month on the steam-boat Platte Valley I captured a captain, a lieutenant and nine privates of the Illinois troops. These were all released upon their parole and a promise not to serve against us until regularly exchanged.

The troops under your command have some few of my officers and men who were captured at Fredericktown and I understand some others that were absent on furlough have also been taken. Still I am satisfied you have not so many of mine as those of yours paroled by me; but as it is hardly fair you should have to feed both lots I should be pleased to release all of those we have captured from their parole if you would please send home those you have belonging to my division of the Missouri State Guard (First Division).

Captain Elliott, of the Thirty-third Illinois, can inform you of those taken on the Iron Mountain Railroad, and Captain Larison, of the Second Illinois Cavalry, can inform you of those taken on the Platte Valley.

Yours, most respectfully,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* It does not appear that General Halleck ever answered this letter; but see Halleck to Carlin, January 29, 1862, post.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL, Saint Louis, Mo., December 4, 1861.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Commanding Department of the Missouri.

GENERAL: In compliance with your (verbal) order to prepare a statement relating to the departments under my charge as provost-marshal, the force employed, how, where, its expense, &c., I beg leave to submit the following:

At the principal office which is under my own especial charge in which is transacted all general business there are employed three clerks at a monthly salary of $110, $75 and $50 respectively. By giving my {p.140} own personal attention as far as possible to every matter pertaining to the duties of the office I have been enabled considerably to reduce the force from that originally employed; it cannot, however, be further reduced, the duties of each being very onerous and requiring uninterrupted attention.

The police department is under the general control of an experienced officer. ... Reports are submitted and instructions given every morning at my office and during the day upon any matter of importance. In relation to this department it is proper to add that the force employed is not used in this county alone. Detectives have been furnished from the force for all points of the State on proper representation to me of their necessity. They have been invaluable in disaffected districts in discovering facts which it has been impossible to obtain by the ordinary means.

I will state that for some weeks past it has been my intention to organize this department almost entirely from enlisted men and arrangements are now in progress for that purpose. It is believed that with but little effort men can be found in the different regiments who under an experienced chief will answer every purpose, and thus while not impairing the efficiency naturally reduce the expense of this branch of the service. Included in the number stated above are three detectives who are used in special cases under my own immediate instructions and are not known to the chief of the department.

...

The military prison is in charge of one keeper at $100, one assistant keeper at $30 per month. The number of prisoners that can be accommodated will not exceed ninety, although there has been as many as 140 confined at one time. Upon an average it will be found that about one-half of them confined at any given time are soldiers confined temporarily for violation of police regulations and who are always returned to their several commands at the earliest opportunity; the remainder are those arrested (here and in other parts of the State) for giving aid and comfort to the enemies of or bearing arms against the Government.

I beg leave respectfully to submit that the present prison is entirely inadequate to security and personal comfort of so many prisoners as are usually confined therein. If some place could be secured at Jefferson Barracks or at the arsenal for those whom it is designed to hold during the war or for a considerable period leaving the present prison for police purposes and prisoners from other causes temporarily confined it would in my opinion be of advantage to the service.

...

I may be permitted to say that on my appointment to the position I hold I found the department greatly disorganized and that from the date of the proclamation of martial law there had been exercised a very general jurisdiction over civil as well as military matters. Perhaps at first it was in a measure necessary, but if so the necessity exists no longer; and it has been my aim by thorough organization to increase its efficiency though operating with a less force and disentangle it from all connection with civil matters except in cases of absolute necessity, and where it is believed the interests of the Government imperatively require it.

The police department of the city is under the control of men of unquestioned loyalty, and a thorough understanding exists between the chief of that department and myself so that there may be co-operation when desired. The executive of the city while he is not to be considered {p.141} loyal is not one who would give aid or assistance against us. He has scrupulously avoided all chance of collision and where the peace and good order of the city has been involved has not hesitated to operate in connection with this department.

The council and aldermen are all of undoubted disloyalty but nothing is to be apprehended from them, the police and executive being the only branches of the city government with which it is desirable that this department should co-operate.

A full recapitulation of the foregoing statement will indicate an expense to the Government of the whole department under my charge of $2,650 per month in addition to my own compensation which has not been fixed. It may be remarked, however, that more than two-thirds of this is for a service not necessarily an incident of the existence of martial law but which must under any circumstances be incurred in some department so long as the present state of affairs exist.

I have the honor to be, general,

GEORGE B. LEIGHTON, Provost-Marshal.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Syracuse, December 5, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

CAPTAIN: I have the honor to report that prisoners are rapidly accumulating on our hands. Every day patrols or pickets bring in men returning from Price’s army, sometimes with arms but more frequently without. Many of them seem anxious to take the oath of allegiance whilst all will swear not to take up arms again. I do not know what are the purposes of the general commanding the department in relation to such prisoners and shall keep them in custody until I receive orders for their disposition.

[JOHN POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.]

–––

Status of some of the Union prisoners captured by General Price at Lexington.

SAINT LOUIS, December 5, 1861.

Brig. Gen. L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army.

GENERAL: The enlisted men of Colonel Mulligan’s regiment of volunteers taken prisoners by the enemy and released on parole have been discharged the service* as directed in General Orders, No. 69, War Department, Adjutant-General’s Office, Washington, August 28, 1861. The commissioned officers are here claiming still to be in the U. S. service and entitled to pay and emoluments.

The question presented is do officers when the enlisted men of their commands under above orders are discharged cease to be officers in {p.142} the service of the United States or not? This is asked in reference to Colonel Mulligan’s regiment but it is desired the decision should apply to all similar cases.

Very respectfully, &c.,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Some or all of the Union soldiers surrendered at Lexington gave a parole that they would not again take up arms against the Confederate States. Hence the order mustering many of them out of the service. Under the Frémont-Price cartel most of the Lexington prisoners were released from this sweeping parole and exchanged. But the controversy about their status continued for some time afterward. Many of the records relating to it are missing-Compiler.

–––

HEADQUARTERS TWENTY-SEVENTH REGIMENT, December 13, 1861.

[Maj. Gen. JOHN POPE.]

GENERAL: Some days ago I addressed a letter to General Halleck in regard to sixty-two men belonging to my regiment who were taken prisoners and made to take an oath not to take up arms against the Southern Confederacy. These men at that time were at Benton Barracks. On the 11th instant they reached this point and reported that General Strong ordered them to this place to be mustered out and decline doing duty. Will you please inform me what course to pursue in regard to them as my letter to the department has not been answered.

Very respectfully,

HENRY G. KENNETT, Lieutenant-Colonel, Commanding Twenty-seventh Ohio.

[Indorsement.]

HEADQUARTERS, Sedalia, Mo., December 13, 1861.

Respectfully referred to headquarters of the department with the recommendation that orders may be given to muster these men out of the service.

FREDK. STEELE, colonel, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 17, 1861.

Col. F. STEELE, Commanding, &c., Sedalia.

COLONEL: The commanding general directs that you have mustered out of the service and discharged those men of the Twenty-seventh Ohio Regiment who are now under parole.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

WILLIAM MCMICHAEL, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

BIRD’S POINT, MO., December 18, 1861.

Adjutant-General KELTON.

DEAR SIR: On the 20th of September last seven of the twelve companies composing the First Illinois Cavalry (Colonel Marshall) surrendered themselves prisoners of war at Lexington and with them were all of the field and staff of said regiment. The non-commissioned officers {p.143} and privates were formally mustered out of service shortly after their release from the enemy and the officers supposed themselves still in service and ready for duty as soon as exchanged. The majority of the officers including myself have been formally exchanged. Colonel Marshall received orders from the State executive to recruit and fill up his regiment and he accordingly issued orders to the company officers to recruit and fill up their companies; and whilst affairs stood thus about the 25th of last month, General Halleck through you issued an order to me to come to this point and take command of two companies (Noleman’s and Burrell’s), and within a few days information has reached me but whether reliable or not I am unable to determine that within a short time and since my departure from Saint Louis General Halleck has decided that the effect of orders from Washington places Colonel Marshall out of the service, but whether the lieutenant-colonel and myself are within the decision or not I have not been able to learn. You can readily perceive that I wish further light. I want to know what decisions have been made touching our regimental organization and who all and who are not decided out of the service (in case any decision has been made on the subject); and in case I am considered in the service I want to know how I am to get the other two companies I am entitled to; whether I would be entitled to take by order of the State executive any two companies he might be willing to furnish or whether he can assign two companies under the officers of the old regiment that have raised new companies. I would like to have the companies as soon as possible so as to enable me to get them fully organized, armed and equipped at the earliest practicable period. Will you do me the favor to send me information on these points as soon as practicable.

Yours, truly,

D. P. JENKINS, Major First Illinois Cavalry.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 19, 1861.

Brig. Gen. W. K. STRONG, Commanding, &c., Benton Barracks.

SIR: It appears that Article XIX, Revised Regulations, is not fully understood. Enlisted men taken prisoners by the enemy and released on parole or when unfit for military service in consequence of wounds, disease or infirmity can only be discharged from the service of the United States by the major-general commanding the department.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

BENTON BARRACKS, April 5, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK.

RESPECTED SIR: We the undersigned respectfully solicit your attention for a few moments in regard to this article concerning the First Illinois Cavalry Volunteers, we having been compelled to come back into the service and that too under false pretenses; and we ask why all the members of the above regiment are not compelled to return if any part of them are? We do respect the oath which circumstances {p.144} compelled us to take when we were taken prisoners at Lexington and there surrendered our arms to General Price of the Confederate Army. We there took a solemn oath before God and man that we would not take up arms against the Southern Confederacy. We consider it our duty to stand by that oath and if we do take up arms again we will have to answer for a sin which we are compelled to commit, and moreover we do not think that an exchange will relieve us from that oath. We cannot think that oath null and void; we would be happy to think so but we do not. The officers of this regiment can return to the service with a clear conscience as they did not take an oath but were released on parole of honor and have been exchanged. We wish to do what is right and we will do that come what will. We hope to hear from you soon.

BENJAMIN F. BROWN, President. M. B. SMITH, Secretary of Meeting.

–––

WASHINGTON, June 25, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK:

It has been reported at this office that certain men in the Thirteenth Missouri Volunteers who were taken prisoners at Lexington and released on parole have been forced into the Twenty-fifth Missouri Volunteers. Some of these men were taken prisoners at Shiloh and bayoneted on the spot; others are said to be liable to similar treatment. Please investigate this matter. Have the paroled men relieved from duty and furloughed until discharged. Call upon their officers for reports.

By order of the Secretary of War:

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.

–––

HDQRS. TWENTY-FIFTH REGIMENT MISSOURI VOLUNTEERS, In Camp near Corinth, July 18, 1862.

ASSISTANT ADJUTANT-GENERAL, Headquarters Department of the Mississippi, Corinth.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit a list* herewith of the non-commissioned officers and privates of the Twenty-fifth Regiment Missouri Volunteers who were taken prisoners at Lexington with remarks set against their names to show how they stand in regard to exchanges. I have recommended the discharge of some inasmuch as I find they did not intend to re-enter the service after being disbanded by order of General Frémont but felt themselves compelled to do so under the orders of the War Department and of Colonel Peabody. These orders it is understood are considered illegal by the department headquarters and the men are supposed to be entitled to their discharges. It will promote the efficiency of the regiment if the subjects of exchange and discharges can be soon passed upon.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHESTER HARDING, JR., Colonel, Commanding Twenty-fifth Missouri Volunteers.

* Omitted.

{p.145}

–––

HDQRS. TWENTY-FIFTH REGIMENT MISSOURI VOLUNTEERS, In Camp near Corinth, July 24, 1862.

Maj. J. A. RAWLINS, Asst. Adjt. Gen., District of West Tennessee.

SIR: I have the honor to address you for the purpose of calling the attention of the commanding general to the condition of the Twenty-fifth Regiment Missouri Volunteers in the command of which I have been since the 4th instant. September 20, 1861, the regiment was surrendered at Lexington, Mo., and in a short time thereafter was released upon parole. In October General Frémont then in command of the department ordered it to be disbanded and the men to be mustered out of service. The order was carried into effect October 26, 1861. Afterward an arrangement was made by Generals Frémont and Price whereby the Camp Jackson prisoners on parole were to be exchanged as far as their numbers reached for an equal number of Lexington prisoners. Under this arrangement a part of the officers and men of this regiment (then known as the Thirteenth Missouri Volunteers) received their release from parole but many still remained under their obligation. In February, 1862, the War Department issued a special order (No. 29) by which the muster-out was cancelled and the officers and men were required to report to regimental headquarters for duty. Col. Everett Peabody who then commanded the regiment thereupon published his order to the effect that those who failed to report would be treated as deserters. Many of the men came back for no other reason than that they supposed these orders could and would be enforced against them. In a few instances men were taken from home by actual force and compelled, to serve. Of both these classes there were those who had been and those who had not been exchanged. The ranks of the regiment were filled by recruiting and every company had more or less new recruits who then enlisted for the first time as well as more or less of the old regiment. At the battle of Shiloh (as was reported among and believed by the men) some of our wounded were recognized by the enemy as having been paroled and were bayoneted on the spot. This report the officers believe to be untrue but it has created uneasiness in the ranks. Some of the latter addressed a memorial to General Halleck upon the subject and also brought the matter before the War Department. I transmit herewith an official copy of a letter of instructions from the Adjutant-General to General Halleck to which I respectfully refer.* I also inclose lists** as follows: first, names of paroled prisoners unexchanged who claim discharges; second, names of noncommissioned officers and privates who were mustered out, released from parole and afterward unwillingly rejoined in consequence of force or of the orders above referred to and who now claim discharges; third, names of paroled prisoners unexchanged who desire to be exchanged and to continue in service; fourth, names of others who have their exchanges and rejoined voluntarily. These desire a recognition of the validity of the certificates given to the Lexington prisoners-one*** is inclosed; all the rest are similar to it. I respectfully ask early action in the premises. Discussion of these topics among the men cannot but lower the morale of the regiment, and although no instances of insubordination have as yet occurred I feel that the present condition of things cannot long continue.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHESTER HARDING, JR., Colonel Twenty-fifth Missouri Volunteers.

* See Thomas to Halleck, June 25, p. 144.

** Lists omitted.

*** Not found.

{p.146}

–––

HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY, Washington, August 20, 1862.

Maj. Gen. U. S. GRANT, Commanding District of [West] Tennessee, Corinth, Miss.:

You will order the Twenty-fifth Missouri Regiment to Saint Louis to report to General Schofield to recruit and to dispose of the unexchanged prisoners still with the regiment. A list of those not exchanged will be furnished to Adjutant-General Thomas, commissioner, now visiting the camps where the prisoners are confined arranging their exchange.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 179.}

HDQRS. DISTRICT OF WEST TENNESSEE, Corinth, Miss., August 30, 1862.

I. The Twenty-fifth Regiment Missouri Volunteers, Col. Chester Harding commanding, will proceed without delay to Saint Louis, Mo., and report to Brigadier-General Schofield for the purpose of recruiting and disposing of the unexchanged prisoners still with the regiment. Two lists of these prisoners will be made immediately and one copy furnished to these headquarters and one copy furnished to Brigadier-General Schofield upon the arrival of the regiment at Saint Louis. The land transportation and camp equipage of the regiment will be turned over to the quartermaster at this place who will furnish the necessary transportation.

...

By order of Maj. Gen. U. S. Grant:

T. S. BOWERS, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS CENTRAL DIVISION OF MISSOURI, Jefferson City, September 16, 1862.

General J. M. SCHOFIELD, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: Were the members of the old Thirteenth Regiment Missouri Volunteers (Colonel Peabody’s) captured at Lexington exchanged or otherwise discharged from their parole as prisoners? Being under the impression that they had been exchanged several of them have joined companies in the First Regiment Cavalry Missouri State Militia. Recently they have been informed that it was a mistake that they were not exchanged and they would be liable to severe treatment in case of capture without having been discharged from their parole. They would be pleased to have some steps taken in the premises to relieve them from this danger if they have not been exchanged. What shall be done with those prisoners captured at Lone Jack and discharged on their parole?

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

BEN. LOAN, Brigadier-General, Missouri State Militia.

{p.147}

[First indorsement.]

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF MISSOURI, Saint Louis, September 19, 1862.

The Lone Jack prisoners will all be mustered out of service.

By order of Brigadier-General Schofield:

C. W. MARSH, Assistant Adjutant-General.

[Second indorsement.]

Send Lexington prisoners to Benton Barracks.

By order of Brigadier-General Schofield:

C. W. MARSH, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Syracuse, December 7, 1861.

General CULLUM:

...

Many of his [Price’s] men have come in and asked to lay down their arms promising to take them up no more. Of course such promises even when accompanied by the oath of allegiance amount to nothing. One-half the men in this section of country have been thus sworn by one side or the other but there are few of them who observe such oaths. The patrolling parties frequently capture men from Price’s army who are at home on furlough or to recruit. I have many such prisoners.

I would also say that I am fearful that important dispatches by telegraph are intercepted between here and Saint Louis-that is that they are taken off from the wires in course of transmittal and communicated to the enemy. It is easy with a short wire and instrument to do this at any point of the line and I therefore very much dislike to send important news by telegraph unless in cipher. A cipher has been made for this department I would respectfully suggest that it be used in all dispatches of importance.

I am, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[JOHN POPE,] Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 14.}

HDQRS. DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Syracuse, December 9, 1861.

Col. A. P. Hovey, Twenty-fourth Indiana Volunteers, is appointed provost-marshal of this district and will be obeyed and respected accordingly. He will establish his headquarters at Otterville or at the cantonment on the Lamine River.

Hereafter all prisoners captured by our patrols, pickets or other detachments except such as are taken to Jefferson City will be sent to Colonel Hovey at Otterville who is hereby charged with the care and safe-keeping of all prisoners within this district belonging to the forces of the enemy or who have been giving him aid and comfort.

{p.148}

Whenever prisoners are sent to the provost-marshal written statements of the allegations against them certified under oath giving details of capture, name, description of person and such other testimony against them as will be sufficient to fix upon them the facts charged will be transmitted with them.

The provost-marshal shall make requisition upon the proper department for the guard for houses and tents, for blankets when needed, for provisions and for all other things required for the security and proper care of the prisoners placed in his keeping, and will furnish as soon as possible to these headquarters copies of the affidavits above specified.

It is only the purpose of the Government to keep such prisoners in confinement until their cases may be acted on and every leniency consistent with their safe-keeping will be shown them.

The provost-marshal is charged with the security of all prisoners properly turned over to him and it is especially enjoined that they be subjected to no hardship nor suffering not incident to captivity under such circumstances.

Commissioned officers will be kept separate from enlisted men and every courtesy proper to their rank will be extended to them. All the provisions of this order will be applied to and will govern the provost-marshal at Jefferson City.

It is not necessary to remind the officers and soldiers of this command that it is as much their duty to be kind and courteous to those whom the fortune of war has thrown into their hands as it is to fight manfully against them when the occasion presents itself, and it is hoped and expected by the general commanding this district that no cases of harsh or discourteous treatment of prisoners may ever occur within his command.

By order of General Pope:

[SPEED BUTLER, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.]

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Cape Girardeau, December 10, 1861.

General WATKINS, New Madrid, Mo.

GENERAL: Your communication of the 4th instant inclosing correspondence* of Colonel Plummer reached me by the hand of Mr. Rodney yesterday. In reply permit me to say that the agreement of Colonel Plummer in reference to your return will be cheerfully and faithfully enforced by me. Nothing can be more satisfactory to me personally than to meet you in the capacity of friend and citizen. Unpleasant circumstances evidently based upon a misapprehension of the aim and object of our Government has occasioned temporary estrangement of many of our hitherto loyal citizens-an apprehension which when dissipated by time will cause many once firm friends to rally again to the standard of our common undivided country. If I properly comprehend the understanding had with my predecessor, Colonel Plummer, you will simply be required to pledge anew your allegiance to the Government, return to your home and transact your usual business and the protecting arm of the military will be thrown around yourself, family and property. In regard to the return of the slaves mentioned by you I can and will in behalf of those with whom I act say that nothing shall {p.149} interpose to prevent their return to you-as your property you have a right to their service. I would not feel authorized to offer you a file of soldiers to forcibly take them to your home; but I can comporting with the order of Major-General Halleck authorize their return to you by permitting no interposition against their return and by acquiescing in any course taken by you to recover them. It would give me pleasure to say honestly to those who are warring against us that while my power lasts if they will return to their homes as I have written to you they shall be protected. The policy of our Government is to conciliate rather than coerce. Hence I hope that when this reaches you it will find you fully prepared to come to us, and hereafter to find you if not positively with us at least holding a position that will enable you by example to do much in causing the return of those who in an unguarded moment threw off their allegiance to the Government of our fathers and united their destiny with one that experience may teach them is not for their good.

Trusting to take you by the hand soon, I am, &c.,

L. F. ROSS, Colonel Seventeenth Illinois Regiment, Commanding.

* Not found.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 11, 1861.

General S. R. CURTIS.

DEAR SIR: As an honest man I would seriously object to taking this oath because that every man that takes it can’t avoid perjury for he can’t support the Government and uphold and sustain the Constitution at the same time.

It does appear to me an unsophisticated individual that our rulers are crazy, and you among the rest if this oath is prescribed by you. You all seem to overlook several facts that are patent to all the world. First of them though not least is that there no longer exists any union of all the States and that there is really less Union feeling in the hearts of the Northern people than in the Southern people. The next and still more prominent fact is that it is impossible to perpetuate or create a union by force. Union don’t mean war and war don’t mean union. The more war the less union. But why reason with crazy men?

NAOMI.

[Inclosure.]

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 5.}

HEADQUARTERS SAINT LOUIS DISTRICT, Saint Louis, Mo., December 6, 1861.

I. To carry out the arrangements for protecting the commerce of the Mississippi as required by General Orders, No. 4. of this district, the oath embodied in paragraph II. and the blanks for names and description are prescribed for the use of the boats and houses engaged in this trade. This oath is also prescribed as the oath of allegiance to be taken and subscribed in obedience to paragraph V of General Orders, No. 13, of the Department of the Missouri, and in all other cases in this command when an oath of allegiance is authorized and required.

II. Oath of allegiance to the United States Government:

I solemnly swear that I will bear true allegiance to the United States and support and sustain the Constitution and laws thereof; that I will maintain the national sovereignty paramount to that of all State, county or confederate powers; that I will discourage, discountenance and forever oppose secession, rebellion and disintegration {p.150} of the Federal Union; that I disclaim and denounce all faith and fellowship with the so-called Confederate States and Confederate armies and pledge my honor, my property and my life to the sacred performance of this my solemn oath of allegiance to the Government of the United States of America.

By order of Brigadier-General Curtis:

N. P. CHIPMAN, Major and Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 24.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 12, 1861.

I. The suffering families driven by rebels from Southwestern Missouri which have already arrived here have been supplied by voluntary contributions made by Union men; others are on the way to arrive in a few days. These must be supplied by the charity of men known to be hostile to the Union. A list will be prepared of the names of all persons of this class who do not voluntarily furnish their quota and a contribution will be levied on them of $10,000 in clothing, provisions and quarters, or money in lieu thereof. This levy will be made upon the following classes of persons in proportion to the guilt and property of each individual: first, those in arms with the enemy who have property in this city; second, those who have furnished pecuniary or other aid to the enemy or to persons in the enemy’s service; third, those who have verbally, in writing or by publication given encouragement to insurgents and rebels.

II. Brig. Gen. S. R. Curtis, U. S. Volunteers, Lieut. Col. B. G. Farrar, provost-marshal-general, and Charles Borg, esq., assessor of the county of Saint Louis, will constitute a board of assessors for levying the afore-mentioned contribution. In determining the amount of property of the individuals assessed the board will take into consideration the official assessment lists for municipal taxes.

III. As soon as any part of this contribution has been assessed by the board the provost-marshal-general will notify the parties assessed, their agents or representatives, stating the amount of provisions, clothing or quarters and the money value thereof required of each; and if not furnished within the time specified in such notice he will issue an execution and sufficient property will be taken and sold at public auction to satisfy the assessment with costs and a penalty of 25 per cent, in addition. Where buildings or parts of buildings are to be used and where any of the sufferers are to be quartered on families care should be taken to produce as little inconvenience to the owners or families as possible, this not being considered a military contribution levied upon the enemy but merely a collection to be made from friends of the enemy for charitable purposes.

IV. If any person upon whom such assessment shall be made shall file with the provost-marshal-general an affidavit that he is a loyal citizen and has been true to his allegiance to the United States he will be allowed one week to furnish evidence to the board to vindicate his character; and if at the end of that time he shall not be able to satisfy the board of his loyalty the assessment shall be increased 10 per cent, and the levy immediately made.

V. The supplies so collected will be expended for the object designated under the direction of the provost-marshal-general with the advice of the State Sanitary Commission. Where moneys are received in lieu of supplies it will be expended for them as they may be required.

{p.151}

Any money not so expended will be turned over to the Sanitary Commission for the benefit of sick soldiers. A strict and accurate account of these receipts and expenditures will be kept and returned to these headquarters.

VI. Any one who shall resist or attempt to resist the execution of these orders will be immediately arrested and imprisoned and will be tried by a military commission.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Syracuse, December 12, 1861.

Colonel STEELE, Sedalia.

COLONEL: The general commanding directs that you send all the prisoners in confinement at Sedalia under proper guard to report to Col. A. P. Hovey, provost-marshal, at Lamine cantonment, except such as are enlisted in Price’s army and whom you deem it safe to release on parole; also a written statement of the allegations against each prisoner certified under oath giving name, description of person, details of capture and such testimony against them as will be sufficient to fix upon them the facts charged. In sending prisoners to Saint Louis you will conform in every particular to the instructions of General Halleck’s dispatch and to the requirements of General Orders, No. 13,* from headquarters of the department, copies of which you will find herewith inclosed.

I am, colonel, your obedient servant,

[C. A. MORGAN,] Aide-de-Camp.

* For General Orders, No. 13, from headquarters Department of the Missouri, see Series I, Vol. VIII, p. 405.

[Inclosure.]

General JOHN POPE:

Send your prisoners here except in cases where you deem it perfectly safe to release them on parole.

H. W. HALLECK.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 12, 1861.

Col. W. P. CARLIN, Commanding U. S. Forces at Pilot Knob, Mo.

COLONEL: In reply to your letter of the 10th instant,* the general commanding directs that you govern yourself with respect to the returning men from Thompson’s army by the requirements of General Orders, No. 13, from the headquarters of this department. Those who you think can be trusted may be released on taking the oath of allegiance and giving their parole that they will not leave their own neighborhood without the authority of the department or district commander; and those upon whom you cannot rely you will hold as prisoners and {p.152} if necessary send them to this place. You will keep distinct lists of both classes for reference, and make records of the oaths and paroles of the former class for evidence against any one violating them.

Very respectfully, your most obedient,

GEO. W. CULLUM, Brigadier-General and Chief of Staff.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Fort Scott, Kans., December 13, 1861.

Maj. Gen. STERLING PRICE, Missouri State Guard.

SIR: On the 7th day of December, A. D. 1861, B. F. Potter, Charles Harding, James N. Bittle, John C. Allsup, were taken prisoners by a Montevallo company on Clear Creek. I think the company was commanded by one Captain Gatewood. The prisoners were at a house on said creek, three of them in charge of one very sick man, viz, B. F. Potter, when they were taken. I have some prisoners here whom I will exchange for those men-one for one. I have had here in the last three months at least 200 prisoners amongst whom were several officers all of whom I have released, some unconditionally and some on parole for exchange; amongst whom is the son of Colonel Rosser who is on parole for exchange, whom you desired to have exchanged in your note to General Lane sometime since. You will confer a favor by forwarding the prisoners to this post by one man with a flag of truce.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

W. R. JUDSON, Colonel, Commanding Post.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Syracuse, December 14, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK:

A large number of immigrants driven from Southwest Missouri are arriving here and at Otterville utterly destitute. Unless something be done for them they must perish of starvation and exposure. There is no means here to shelter them nor provide for them. I can issue them rations, which in fact I must do or see them perish, but no shelter can be found for them. It seems to be absolutely necessary for the Government to provide for these people daring the winter at least. If I were in the neighborhood of any considerable town I would quarter them on the inhabitants, but this section of the country is sparsely populated and already nearly exhausted of supplies. Some speedy action ought to be taken in relation to these unfortunate people.

I am, general, respectfully, your obedient servant,

[JOHN POPE,] Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, Saint Louis, December 14, 1861.

S. HATCH, Provost-Marshal, Saint Joseph, Mo.

SIR: Your communication of the 8th instant advising me of your appointment to the office of provost-marshal of Saint Joseph, Mo., has been received. Until fall and explicit instructions are sent for your {p.153} guidance you will reduce to writing the evidence in each case brought before you and forward the same to this office together with your opinion thereon. All prisoners must be retained until directions in relation thereto shall be received. In trivial cases or where there is no evidence you will dispose of the matter without reference to this office. By trivial cases is meant such as do not involve the life, liberty or property of the accused by reason of any treasonable charges.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

P. S.-Since writing the above we have just ascertained that arrangements are being made in relation to the passports of British subjects and information thereon will be promulgated in a day or two.

[B. G. F.]

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 27.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 16, 1861.

...

8. Prisoners of war held by us whether officers or soldiers while in confinement will be regularly supplied with the army ration by the commissary department on the requisition of the officer in charge of such prisoners. Where prisoners of war are at large on their parole they will be expected to procure their own subsistence, and no commutation or pay for board will be allowed unless by special orders from these headquarters. A separate account will be kept of all supplies furnished to prisoners of war.

9. Post and depot commissaries will correspond directly with the chief commissary of the department. They will exercise a supervisory control over the commissaries to whom they make issues to the extent of seeing that the supplies are properly distributed and taken care of. This, however, will not apply to cases where the post or depot commissary is junior in rank.

...

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 23, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK.

GENERAL: I had heard and believed that Senator Johnson was in Western Virginia but the Hon. James H. Birch, who as you are aware was a prisoner in General Price’s camp, informed me upon his return that he was at the houses of some of Mr. Johnson’s relations in the neighborhood of Price’s army, and heard remarks made by those relatives indicating that he (Johnson) then was or had lately been with that army. I refer you to Judge Birch, who is in the city at the Planters’ House. As to Senator Polk I have no other information than that he left the city in a clandestine manner and that his destination was not made known even to his family. He is reported to have gone South to join the rebels but I know not the authority for the report.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. R. GAMBLE.

{p.154}

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Cape Girardeau, December 23, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK, Department of the Missouri, Saint Louis, Mo.

MY DEAR SIR: Upon assuming command at this post I found that a correspondence had been carried on between Colonel Plummer and General Watkins, of Jackson, Mo. The purport of the correspondence seemed to indicate a desire upon the part of General Watkins, whom you no doubt are aware has been in the camp of the rebel army under Jeff. Thompson, to return to his home in this county. The character and influence as well as position of General Watkins would make him a valuable accession to our cause as well as do much toward weakening that of the enemy. The tone of the general indicates an assumption on his part that he has never been strictly speaking in arms against the Government. That he was connected originally with the Missouri State Guard he does not deny but views it in the light of a State organization only created for the defense of the State from aggression on both sides desiring to preserve a neutrality; hence he states that the terms proposed to him, to wit, to return and take the oath, would raise a presumption that he had once been disloyal which he emphatically denies. Some property was taken from him which he desires as part of the terms should be returned to him; the property consists of negroes and stock. I am advised by those who knew General Watkins personally that he is a man of high moral character, strict integrity and unquestionable honor. The immediate point at issue is can he (General Watkins) be made an exception to the general rule as to the obligation to be administered. Evidently the position taken by the general is based upon his misapprehension of the object of the oath and is clearly taken with honest conviction of right on his part and in this instance it may be well to authorize his return without any positive manifestation of loyalty other than that which would necessarily grow out of positive loyal action. He proposes then to return to his home, transact his usual business and to be in all things loyal to the Government for which he professes so much attachment. Inclosed I therefore send you so much of the correspondence* as may tend to throw additional light upon the question.

Hoping to hear from you and be advised, I remain, &c.,

L. F. ROSS, Colonel Seventeenth Illinois, Commanding.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS SIXTH REGIMENT KANSAS VOLUNTEERS, Fort Scott, December 23, 1861.

Major-General PRICE, or ANY OTHER OFFICER COMMANDING CONFEDERATE FORCES IN MISSOURI:

The bearer of this goes to you to ask an exchange of prisoners. We have six prisoners belonging to your forces, to wit, D. S. Graham, W. Smith, W. Brice, J. Smith, J. J. Jones and a Captain Baker. I understand you have four prisoners belonging to my regiment, to wit, B. F. Potter, Charles Harding, James N. Bittle and J. C. Allsup. If you will send my men here or appoint a place where I can send your prisoners {p.155} and make the exchange I will attend to it at once. By so doing you will relieve many families from intense anxiety on both sides of the line.

I am, sir, yours, on behalf of humanity,

W. R. JUDSON, Colonel, Commanding Sixth Regiment Kansas Volunteers.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 34.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, Mo., December 26, 1861.

I. In virtue of authority conferred by the President of the United States martial law heretofore declared in this city will be enforced. In virtue of the same authority martial law is hereby declared and will be enforced in and about all railroads in this State.

It is not intended by this declaration to interfere with the jurisdiction of any civil court which is loyal to the Government of the United States and which will aid the military authorities in enforcing order and punishing crimes.

...

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 26, 1861.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Commanding Department of the Missouri.

GENERAL: The communication addressed by a committee of the U. S. Senate to yourself* and referred to me for report has received my careful attention. The evidence I have that Waldo P. Johnson is at present in Virginia or elsewhere in the seceded States though not positive is of such a strong presumptive character as to leave no doubt of the fact on my mind. Positive proof I am credibly informed can be had that he did publicly advocate the right and propriety of the secession of Missouri. I have no information from reliable sources of any participation on his part in the rebellion further than the encouragement given by his association and intimate relations with C. F. Jackson and Sterling Price, kept up after the battle of Boonville. I am unable to ascertain any cause preventing his attendance on the Senate.

Mr. Trusten Polk has gone South. I have reliable information that he went clandestinely through Southeast Missouri to Memphis, Tenn. The letter referred to by the committee addressed by Mr. Polk to Peter S. Wilks has been seen by a number of gentlemen in this city who know the handwriting of Mr. Polk well and who are positive as to its genuineness. The original is in possession of Mr. W. D. Murphy who resides at Linn Creek, Camden County, Mo.

I am, general, very respectfully,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

* Not found.

{p.156}

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 26, 1861.

COMMANDING OFFICER, Cape Girardeau, Mo.:

The provost-marshal at your post has notified me that he has levied an assessment for the relief of Union men in destitute circumstances coming into your lines. I am instructed by Major-General Halleck to direct you to countermand the order for the assessment and to report to headquarters the number and condition of refugees who have come within your lines and are remaining there for safety when the proper order will be directed from headquarters.

Very respectfully,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

–––

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIST., MISSOURI STATE GUARD, New Madrid, Mo., December 28, 1861.

Col. W. P. CARLIN, U. S. Army, Commandant, Ironton, Mo.

SIR: Your favor of December 11 by the hands of Captain Higdon, Missouri State Guard, was this day received. I understand from Captain Higdon that you have written to me before but I assure you that yours of 11th instant is the only communication received or they should have been promptly answered.

In reference to your proposition for the exchange of prisoners I will state that I have written to General Halleck* proposing to publish a general order releasing from parole all of your men whom I have at various times captured if he would issue a general order ordering all that have been captured from me to be released. I have not yet received an answer to the letter but expect one daily, and if he does not accept my proposition then I will cheerfully make an arrangement with you gentlemen who being better acquainted with the circumstances are better able to decide.

I start on an expedition which I think will offset all you can catch of my homesick men.

Yours, most respectfully,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* See Thompson to Halleck, Dec. 2, p. 139.

–––

MCDOWELL’S COLLEGE, Saint Louis, January 1, 1862.

General H. W. HALLECK, Commanding.

DEAR SIR: The prisoners confined in this building would beg leave to express through their committee their present condition and ask your honor to alleviate in some degree their present crowded condition, and request that a room be prepared for our sick fellow-prisoners who are now compelled to lay and listen to the continued noise and bustle. At this time there are a great many on the sick list and the number is rapidly increasing. A malignant form of measles has made its appearance amongst us and there are a large number of prisoners who are confined here who never have had the disease who are liable to become {p.157} sick with it. Several persons have already died from various diseases and unless something can be done to thin out our rooms and remove the sick an alarming mortality will inevitably result. We would also respectfully request that our physicians be allowed the privilege of attending their sick friends if such a room be prepared near by. We would also represent that there are a large number of citizens among the prisoners who have expressed themselves willing to take an oath not to take up arms against the Federal Government as they are anxious to return to their homes in peace; also that the soldiers taken in arms and held as prisoners of war would state through this committee a willingness to take an obligation not to take up arms again until honorably exchanged and pledge themselves as honorable men to respect such obligation.

These things we respectfully submit for your consideration.

WM. HILL, J. M. TUTON, CHAS. H. HARLAN, SOLON D. MARTIN, Committee.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 6, 1862.

Col. F. STEELE, Commanding, &c., Sedalia, Mo.

COLONEL: I have received reliable information from Lexington that Joe H. Nichols and Frank Thomas released from arrest by you are the most active and dangerous rebels in that part of the country. The former was a member of the Missouri band who robbed and fired upon Union men in Lexington, and Thomas it is said was one of Joe Shelby’s party who robbed the steamer Sunshine. Nichols while on his way from Sedalia on the stage to Lexington pulled a secession flag from his pocket and displayed it in every place through which he passed. Moreover the petition of Union men which was presented to Major Crittenden was mostly a forgery, the few Union men who did actually sign it being forced to do so by the secession friends of Nichols. The evidence is very strong that these are both very dangerous men and should never have been released.

Greater caution should be observed in such matters and hereafter no one will be released without requiring of him the oath of allegiance and parole of honor the violation of which shall be followed by death. I will send you a blank form for such oath and parole.

Very respectfully, &c.,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

SPRINGFIELD, ILL., January 7, 1862.

Mr. S. CAMERON, Secretary of War.

DEAR SHIM There are several men in my office who wish to ask of you a question. The question grows out of these facts: first, these men joined Capt. John Burnap’s company, of the First Regiment Illinois Cavalry; second, these men were taken by the secessionists at the battle of Lexington, Mo., about the 20th of September, 1861, and held as prisoners of war; third, these men were released-set free by the secessionists-and the condition and oath having been administered to our Union men who are now present by the secessionists was that {p.158} these men should never take up arms against the Southern Confederacy or against the State of Missouri. If this oath of our men should be violated by them then death was the inevitable penalty. These men were so released upon the foregoing conditions and were brought to this city. These men and the whole company of Captain Burnap were duly and legally mustered out of service by Captain Watson of the Regular Army of the United States. A written discharge was given by Captain Burnap and ordered so by Captain Watson. Now the question is can Captain Burnap or other person duly authorized according to the Articles of War and the rules and regulations of your Department force these men-this company-into said service again or any other service as members, privates or otherwise of said company against the will of each or any or all said persons? Please answer fully and particularly at as early a moment as possible.

Your friend,

W. H. HERNDON.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE. MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 7, 1362.

Capt. DANIEL HUSTON, Provost-Marshal, Sedalia.

CAPTAIN: Your communication of the 5th instant with your weekly report* has been received. Your action in sending your prisoners to Otterville before the military commission there sitting is approved. You will continue to send them to Otterville so long as the commission remains in session. After the adjournment of the commission you will again comply with the provisions of Order No. 1. Continue to send your reports to this office as in the present case. Captain Magoffin is to be considered as a prisoner of war and to be sent down with the next batch of prisoners.

Very respectfully,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

* Not found.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 11, 1862.

Col. F. STEELE, Commanding, Sedalia.

COLONEL: Yours of the 9th* is just received. I entirely disapprove of the release of prisoners of war on their parole to go where they please. Most of them do not keep their parole at all and merely serve as spies about our lines and get up insurrections. This is especially the case with “Virginia gentlemen” of the class you refer to. They pay no regard whatever to their oath of allegiance. All prisoners of war that are taken in arms or in the enemy’s service should be held as such and not allowed to leave camp. This taking of prisoners and releasing them over and over again is all wrong; it is time to end it. All such men should be sent here where they can be retained or exchanged. Such men as the Washingtons and Magoffins are not proper persons for release.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

{p.159}

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 11, 1862.

Dr. JOHN T. HODGEN, Surgeon-General, Hospital corner Fifth and Chestnut.

DOCTOR: You will not permit friends of prisoners under your care to furnish articles of clothing and diet nor to visit the patients except in cases of extreme illness or pressing business, in all of which cases you will be the sole judge of the propriety of granting the permission.

I am, doctor, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 14, 1862.

Col. L. F. Ross, Commanding, Cape Girardeau, Mo.

COLONEL: I have delayed answering your letter of December 23 in relation to General Watkins in order to obtain certain information which I have been expecting about General W. and others in that part of the country. Very many of those who have returned from the enemy and given their parole have acted as spies on our operations giving the enemy all the information they could obtain, assisting in getting up insurrections and planning the burning of bridges, &c. It is therefore necessary to observe due precaution in this matter.

If General Watkins has been in the enemy’s service either State or Confederate he must come back in one of two capacities-either as a prisoner of war or as a citizen returning to his allegiance. If he returns as a prisoner of war he may be released on his parole of honor that he will remain quietly on his farm giving no information or assistance of any kind to the enemy and that he will present himself at your post, or any other, when called for. If he returns as a loyal citizen he certainly cannot object to taking the oath of allegiance. Such oath will not as a general rule be required of men who have not been in the enemy’s service or have in no way assisted the enemy although they may have been in the Confederate States. For example secessionists here in Saint Louis have not been required to take any oath of allegiance but if they have been in the enemy’s service and now wish to return to their allegiance they are invariably required to take the oath and sometimes to give additional security.

If General W. should decide to take the oath all stock taken from him should be returned. With regard to his slaves if any are in your camp as fugitives they are so held in positive violation of General Orders, No. 3, of 1861, unless such slaves were taken in virtue of the act of Congress. Except in the case provided for by Congress troops should be permitted neither to steal slaves nor to catch and return them to their owners or pretended owners. The military are neither slave stealers nor slave catchers. To avoid all difficulties about this matter keep fugitives out of camp and let the question of ownership be decided by the civil tribunals.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

{p.160}

–––

ADJUTANT-GENERAL’S OFFICE, Washington, January 18, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, U. S. Army, Saint Louis, Mo.:

Please forward for the general-in-chief without delay a list of prisoners of war with rank of each in your custody.

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Cape Girardeau, Mo., January 21, 1862.

General WATKINS, New Madrid, Mo.

MY DEAR SIR: The following is an extract from General Halleck’s communication of 14th instant which reached this post a day or two since:

If General Watkins has been in the enemy’s service either State or Confederate he must come back in one of two capacities-either as prisoner of war or as a citizen returning to his allegiance. If he returns as prisoner of war he may be released on his parole, of honor that he will remain quietly on his farm giving no information or assistance of any kind to the enemy and that he will present himself at your post or any other when called for.

In reference to the question of property General Halleck says:

If General Watkins should decide to take the oath all stock taken from him should be returned.

I am extremely anxious, my dear sir, that you should return to your home and pursue your daily avocation, feeling myself that your age as well as your inclinations dictate that peace and quiet are so well befitting one of your position. Whichever of the courses prescribed by Major-General Halleck you see proper to pursue I need not assure you that so far as my command is concerned everything consistent with my duty to my Government will be done by me to make your return and residence among your old friends pleasant. I sincerely hope that you will return to your home and in doing so I have every confidence that you will by your influence contribute to the restoration of quiet and renewed good feeling in this section of Missouri. You will pardon my earnestness but I cannot but desire your well-being and good from the acquaintance I feel I have formed with you by both communication and report.

I am, your obedient servant,

L. F. ROSS, Colonel, Commanding Post.

–––

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIST., MISSOURI STATE GUARD, New Madrid, January 22, 1862.

Col. LEONARD F. Ross, U. S. Army, Commandant, Cape Girardeau.

SIR: I am informed that many of my men who are your prisoners are suffering for insufficient clothing. I also hear that the charitable citizens of Cape Girardeau are willing to supply their wants if allowed to by yourself. I would therefore ask that you would grant this privilege as I understand it was allowed in Saint Louis.

{p.161}

If the citizens will not be permitted to furnish these things will I be allowed to send them? I have been anxiously awaiting an answer from General Halleck to my proposition to make a general exchange of prisoners for we will get our accounts confused, and I will have to commence catching citizens who will offset those whom your men are now capturing.

Yours, respectfully,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 25, 1862.

General N. B. BAKER, Adjutant-General of Iowa, Des Moines.

GENERAL: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter* of the 17th in relation to the exchange of prisoners of war. I have frequently urged upon the Government at Washington the policy of exchanging prisoners but have received no authority to do so except in two particular cases. I have urgently asked for a general authority and hope soon to receive it.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 27, 1862.

Maj. Gen. STERLING PRICE, Commanding, &c., Springfield, Mo.

GENERAL: A man calling himself L. V. Nicholas came to my headquarters a day or two since with a duplicate of your letter of the 12th instant. On being questioned he admitted that he belonged to your service, that he had come in citizens’ dress from Springfield avoiding some of our military posts and passing through others in disguise and without reporting himself to the commanders. He said that he had done this by your direction. On being asked for his flag of truce he pulled from his pocket a dirty handkerchief with a short stick tied to one corner.

You must be aware, general, that persons so sent through our lines and past our military posts to these headquarters are liable to the punishment of death. They are no more nor less than spies and probably are sent by you to this city to act as such. I shall send Mr. Nicholas back to your camp; but if you send any more persons here in the same way they will be regarded as spies and tried and condemned as such.

You must know, general, that the laws and usages of war require that a bearer of a flag of truce should report at the nearest post and should not pass the outer line of sentinels without permission. He should not even approach within gunshot of a sentinel without displaying his flag and receiving a signal to advance. If he have dispatches he should send for an officer to receive and receipt for them, which officer should direct the flag of truce to immediately leave our lines. Answers to such dispatches should immediately be sent to you by us in the same way.

{p.162}

In a postscript to the copy of your letter of the 12th instant just received you call my attention to the fact that a band of men are “firing private houses, barns, mills, &.c” I presume you refer to a band of outlaws on the Kansas frontier. They do not belong to my command and they entered this department without my authority. As soon as I heard of their depredations I ordered General Pope to either drive them out of the State or to disarm and confine them.

Be assured, general, that no acts of wanton spoliation such as “firing private houses, barns, mills,” &c., and “burning and destroying railroad bridges,” &c., will be countenanced by me. On the contrary I propose to punish with the utmost severity every act of wanton destruction of property, public or private, and every act of pillage, marauding, robbery and theft committed in this department no matter under whose orders or authority the guilty parties may have acted.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General, Commanding Department.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 28, 1862.

Brig. Gen. L. THOMAS Adjutant-General of the Army, Washington.

GENERAL: I inclose herewith lists* of prisoners of war so far as I have received them. I have not been able to get the names of many of the prisoners taken in Northern Missouri as the officers there pay very little attention to orders or regulations respecting returns; moreover very many of the common country people who entered Price’s army through ignorance and deception have been released on taking the oath of allegiance and giving bonds for future good conduct. This course has been adopted partly as a matter of policy and partly for the reason that we had no proper place for their confinement. Alton prison has been put in order and will be occupied this week. I inclose a copy of the oath of allegiance* required of those who are released. None are released except on his own application.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Omitted.

–––

SAINT LOUIS January 29, 1862.

Maj. Gen. D. HUNTER, Commanding Department of Kansas, Fort Leavenworth.

GENERAL: Your letter of the 23d instant in relation to the exchange of Captain Robb is received. I will in a few days enter into a negotiation for an exchange having just received authority for that purpose. The depredations of Jennison’s men in Jackson, Cass and Johnson Counties are doing us immense injury in this State by making secessionists of large numbers of Union men. They do more harm than Price’s whole army. I sincerely hope you will keep them out of this State.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major. General.

{p.163}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 29, 1862.

Col. L. F. Ross, Commanding, Cape Girardeau, Mo.

COLONEL: Your letters* of the 19th and 21st instant have been received.

...

In regard to the release of prisoners on taking the prescribed oath of allegiance great care should be taken to avoid deception as to the real intentions of those released. Bonds should also be required where practicable. Where there is any doubt of the future good conduct of those asking to take the oath of allegiance they should be sent here for exchange.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major. General.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Cape Girardeau, January 30, 1862.

General N. W. WATKINS, New Madrid, Mo.

MY DEAR SIR: Your wife can return to her home in Jackson unmolested. The purpose of my Government is not to make war on women and children. Your son who has taken the oath will not be interfered with no matter where he may reside. His occupancy of your farm will not prevent the Government taking such steps hereafter toward the confiscation of such property as may be owned by disloyal citizens as in the judgment of our rulers may be wise and prudent. I have no reply from General Halleck further than heretofore communicated to you. I beg leave, however, to further insist on your pursuing one of the other of his suggestions.

I am, truly, your obedient servant,

L. F. ROSS, Colonel, Commanding.

–––

ALTON, January 31, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: I see you are about to send the rebel prisoners to Alton. If so and the General Government will let the contract for guarding them for one month, two, three or four months as the case may be I will guard the prisoners for the sum of $5,000 per month, you furnishing me with the following arms: one hundred stands of Government arms: two 6-pounders, and ammunition for same at forty rounds to each stand of arms. I will give you bond in the sum of $5,000 to faithfully perform any contract which you may make with me. I will further pay you $50 for each and every prisoner that will escape from the prison. I will guarantee to deliver every rebel dead or alive to you when called for that you may deliver up to me at Alton.

I remain, your obedient servant,

JOHN E. COPPINGER.

{p.164}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 30.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, February 3, 1862.

I. Where an exchange of prisoners of war is made under authority from these headquarters a descriptive list of the persons so exchanged will be sent to the assistant adjutant-general of the department exhibiting in parallel columns the names and rank of the parties exchanged with the designation of the companies, regiments or corps to which they belong. These lists should also state the time and place of capture and whether or not the parties exchanged had been released on parole.

II. All prisoners of war belonging to the U. S. Army or volunteers on parole in this department will report by letter to the assistant adjutant-general of the department stating name and rank, with the designation of company, regiment or corps to which they belong, the time and place of capture, the nature of parole (with copy if possible), in order that they may be duly exchanged.

III. All prisoners of war belonging or claiming to belong to the Confederate forces now in this department who desire an exchange will make similar reports to the assistant adjutant-general of the department. It is proper to remark in this connection that persons charged with the violation of the laws of war as spies, bridge-burners, marauders, &c., will not be exchanged but will be held for trial under such charges; and that those not under such charges who are willing to take the oath of allegiance and give security for their future good conduct may if deemed expedient be released without exchange. All persons exchanged as prisoners of war will be sent to the enemy’s lines under a proper escort and will not be permitted to remain in this department.

IV. It having been ascertained that officers of the enemy have proposed for exchange the names of a number of our troops as prisoners of war on parole who have already been exchanged it is directed that no exchange of persons not in actual custody will be made without special authority from these headquarters.

V. The following tariff of exchange proposed by Maj. Gen. Sterling Price is adopted and will be followed until further orders:

Where the same grades cannot be exchanged for each other 2 of the next lower grade will be substituted-that is 1 major-general for 2 brigadiers, or 4 colonels, or 8 lieutenant-colonels, or 16 majors, or 32 captains, or 64 lieutenants, or 128 non-commissioned officers, or 256 privates. In this tariff no distinction will be made between first and second lieutenants, or between sergeants and corporals. Of course alternations of grades can be made where necessary on the same basis. Musicians, wagoners and others will be exchanged as privates or noncommissioned officers according as they are rated in our service.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 33.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, February 8, 1862.

I. In General Orders, No. 30, current series, section 5, in relation to the tariff of exchange of prisoners of war proposed by Major-General Price, agreed to by the major-general commanding this department and {p.165} also it is understood by Major-General Polk, no provision is made respecting medical officers. When exchanged it will be according to their assimilated rank.

II. As humanity requires and the usages of civilized warfare permit that medical officers should be treated differently from ordinary prisoners of war it is proposed to officers commanding the enemy’s forces to adopt the following rule with respect to them: Where captured with other prisoners of war they will be retained to take charge of their own sick and wounded as long as their services are so required. When their services are not required for this purpose or when the particular command with which they are taken is exchanged or released they will be sent back to their own lines under a flag of truce without parole or exchange. In the meantime they will be subject to exchange according to assimilated rank. While employed in the care of the sick or wounded prisoners of war they will be allowed all proper facilities and indulgences. When released on parole the performance of medical duties in the field or hospital will not be construed as a violation of parole. Exceptions will be made in regard to limits and indulgences only in special cases, as in cases of insurgents or the danger of the escape of other prisoners, when the reasons of the exception will be reported to these headquarters.

III. These terms with respect to medical officers taken prisoners of war will be proposed to the commanding officers of the enemy’s forces in or adjacent to this department, and if agreed to by them they will be carried into effect; if not agreed to such medical officers will be treated the same as other prisoners of war.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 39.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, February 14, 1862.

I. Information having been received that certain judicial officers intrusted with the administration of the criminal laws and ordinances in this department have misunderstood the objects and purposes of the establishment of martial law in this city of Saint Louis, and in consequence of such misunderstanding have failed to enforce all those laws and ordinances, and as crimes and misdemeanors should at all times be strictly suppressed, it is hereby enjoined upon all such civil officers, whether as judges, attorneys, sheriffs, marshals, coroners, clerks, justices of the peace, presiding officers of police courts, constables or members of the police to strictly enforce all criminal laws and ordinances; to have arrested, tried and punished in the courts established in the State and in the manner prescribed by the laws of the State all persons guilty of any violation of such laws and ordinances in the same manner as if martial law had not been declared to exist.

II. And it is especially enjoined upon the judge of the Saint Louis criminal court to have a full complement of grand jurors at every sitting of the court; to strictly charge said grand jurors to diligently inquire into all crimes and misdemeanors under the laws of the State that may come to their knowledge and present for trial such offenders known to them. And the assistant circuit attorney for this county is particularly required to faithfully aid and assist the said grand jurors {p.166} and officers of said court in the discharge of their duties and to strictly perform all charges devolving upon him by the laws of the State.

III. By the establishment of martial law in the city of Saint Louis it is not designed to interfere with or suspend the operation of the laws and ordinances of the State or city with reference to crimes and misdemeanors nor the remedies and process of the civil courts except so far as the interests of the Government imperatively require. The civil authorities who attempt to interfere with the execution of military orders emanating from these headquarters will be punished for military offense but in all other cases it is their duty to enforce the laws and punish crimes and misdemeanors.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SPRINGFIELD, [Mo.], February 16, 1862. (Via Lebanon.)

Major-General HALLECK.

SIR: General Curtis left here with the army yesterday morning; marched twenty-four miles yesterday. Has just sent me sixteen prisoners. Among them are Col. Thomas R. Freeman, Maj. D. D. Berry, jr., and General McBride [and] Capt. A. C. Dickinson, chief of engineers on Major-General Price’s staff, and Capt. R. M. Donald, quartermaster. The surgeon and assistant surgeon of Colonel Gates’ Confederate cavalry also taken. ...

Respectfully,

JAS. K. MILLS, Lieutenant-Colonel Twenty-fourth Missouri Volunteers. Comdg.

–––

HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY, Washington, February 17, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Commanding Department of the Missouri.

GENERAL: I am directed by Major-General McClellan to inclose herewith an extract from the cartel between Great Britain and the United States in 1813 showing the relative value placed upon the different grades. The general desires this may be adopted as a basis in any exchange of prisoners which you may make in future.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

ARTHUR MCCLELLAN, Captain and Aide-de-Camp.

[Inclosure.]

-Rate of Exchange adopted in the Cartel between Great Britain and the United States, signed May 12, 1813.-

General commanding in chief or admiral, 60 men; lieutenant-general or vice-admiral, 40 men; major-general or rear-admiral, 30 men; brigadier-general or commodore, with a broad pennant and a captain under him, 20 men; colonel or captain of a line-of-battle ship, 15 men; lieutenant-colonel or captain of a frigate, 10 men; major or commander of a sloop-of-war, bomb-ketch, fire-ship, or packet, 8 men; captain or lieutenant {p.167} or master, 6 men; lieutenant or master’s mate, 4 men; sub-lieutenant or ensign, or midshipman, warrant officers, masters of merchant vessels and captains of private armed vessels, 3 men; non-commissioned officers or lieutenants and mates of private armed vessels, mates of merchant vessels and all petty officers of ships of war, 2 men; private soldiers or seamen, 1 man.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Alton, Ill., February 21, 1862.

Capt. N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General, Department of the Mississippi.

CAPTAIN: I respectfully recommend that the officers on parole be sent to some other place. I have reason to believe that their presence here exercises a bad influence on the men. I have allowed them to visit the men’s quarters occasionally as I cannot well refuse them permission to do so, and there are so many of them here (fifty or more) that some of them are within the prison limits all the time nearly during the day. I think if they could be removed to some other place it would be a great benefit to us.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

S. BURBANK, Lieutenant-Colonel Thirteenth Infantry, Commanding.

P. S.-Since writing the above I have determined not to allow any further visits of the officers to the men, having good reason to believe some of them have made an improper use of the privilege of doing so.

S. B.

–––

PLANTERS’ HOUSE, February 21, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK.

GENERAL: Permit me to add to the few words I spoke to you the other day in respect to Brigadier-General Price a word or two in writing, which you may place upon the files or not according to your own discretion. Having known both his father and himself intimately and well. I have the most undoubting confidence that he will redeem to the letter all I thus assume to write in his name. He makes the point that if he is exchanged he must almost necessarily go back to the army and this he is really averse to doing. He argues (on the contrary) that if he is paroled on his honor and allowed to go home that his conceptions of honor would of course prevent him from disserving the Government of the United States in any imaginable degree (directly or even indirectly), and that he would feel at liberty to resign his commission (as he would do) almost directly.

So of Surgeon Cross who was present and a party to both our conversations-the one when they called on me before I came to you and the other when I subsequently called on them. As the homes of both these prisoners are within our lines and where I believe everything is in our power may their cases not be a little different from some others?

My own judgment is most decided and emphatic that if such a course be permissible in any case it will be even judicious (as well as magnanimous) to accord it in this case.

{p.168}

I scarcely feel permitted to repeat what the sentiments of both of them are toward Jackson and his supporters, particularly since his scheming has virtually superseded Major-General Price; but I would trust my head on it that they would discourage and depress the cause of the rebellion more during the next ten days could they be at home than even a company of sharpshooters could do. Of course I am as well satisfied as it is possible to be upon such a subject that they are both forever done with the rebellion and that they will not only appreciate your clemency and protection at its intrinsic value but bring hundreds to a like appreciation and determination with themselves.

Pardon me, general, if writing thus earnestly I have written in any sense amiss. I have some business matters which it was my purpose to bring to your notice while I was here but in the midst of such employments and congratulations as at present occupy you I will postpone them until I can write you from home.

With great respect, your friend and servant,

JAMES H. BIRCH.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE GUARD, Camp at Cove Creek, Ark., February 23, 1862.

Maj. Gen. D. HUNTER.

GENERAL: I am instructed by Maj. Gen. S. Price to propose the exchange of officers as follows, taken by Colonel Deitzler in La Fayette County, to-wit: Capt. Up. B. Winsor, Company H, Second Infantry, Eighth Division; Capt. J. R. Barnett, Company H, Second Infantry, Eighth Division. He will exchange rank for rank or one of a higher for two of a lower rank. Should you accept the proposition you will furnish these officers with a safe conduct to the headquarters of this army when an equivalent therefor will be promptly given you.

I am, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

W. H. BRAND, Assistant Adjutant-General.

[Not received by General Hunter he having left the Department of Kansas.]

–––

ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S OFFICE, February 26, 1862.

JAMES O. BROADHEAD, Esq., U. S. District Attorney, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: I have received two letters* from General N. W. Watkins (dated I think at New Madrid) in which he complained bitterly of harsh treatment by our people and protests strongly his innocence of any crime against the United States and any forcible opposition against the Government. He complains that his property to a large amount negroes, horses, mules, wagons, &c., are taken from his plantations and are used or destroyed by our army at Cape Girardeau. He gave as a reason for remaining at New Madrid that he was afraid of being {p.169} imprisoned (not tried, for that he says he does not fear, being innocent) if within our reach. I have for many years had a very friendly feeling for General Watkins and I mourned over the weakness of heart which led him to favor (without understanding as I suppose) the first criminal movements of the insurgents in Missouri. I still have a very kindly feeling for him and hope that he may be dealt with as leniently as the state of his case will permit. I do not know whether he has been indicted upon any criminal charge but from a passage in one of his letters I infer that he has been. You will oblige me by furnishing the requisite information-all you know about him in connection with the rebellion and especially his present status before the tribunals, civil and military. I at first thought of writing to General Halleck upon the subject but upon reflection thought it more proper officially to write to you. I still wish to befriend General Watkins as far as I can properly do it and in that spirit I solicit an early answer.

Most respectfully, your obedient servant,

EDWARD BATES, Attorney-General.

* Not found.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 50.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, February 28, 1862.

I. Where any considerable number of prisoners of war are captured the officers should be separated as soon as possible from the privates. Complete lists should be made as soon as practicable stating name, rank, regiment and corps of each individual; one copy of such list should be sent to these headquarters and another furnished to the officer placed in charge of them. When turned over to the commanding officer of a depot they should be receipted for and a copy of the receipt sent to these headquarters. As a general rule officers will not be given their paroles until they reach the depot and then only by authority of the general commanding-the department. Medical officers will not be separated from the prisoners but will be required to attend their own sick and wounded. For this purpose they will be given a special parole allowing them all proper facilities.

II. In the care of the sick and wounded no distinction whatever will be made between friends and foes. Presents from friends to the sick and wounded prisoners in hospitals will therefore be distributed to all alike under the direction of the chief medical officer.

III. Prisoners will be rationed the same as our own troops. The commanding officers of prison depots will appoint boards including one surgeon of the command to examine and decide what articles of clothing and bedding are necessary for the health and proper cleanliness of the prisoners where not supplied by their own Government or friends, and requisitions will be made on the quartermaster’s department for such articles as may be needed. Where it can be done clothing not of army color will be issued. Receipts should be given for all articles the same as in case of our enlisted men; the issue in all cases to be witnessed by a commissioned officer.

IV. For police purposes prisoners will be divided into squads and a chief of each squad appointed or elected as may be deemed best. Officers will be detailed to see that the prisoners police their quarters daily in a thorough manner; those refusing to do so will be placed in close confinement until they are willing to do their duty to themselves {p.170} in this matter. They will also see that the prisoners are cleanly in their persons; that their bedding is properly aired, and that their rations are properly cooked and of good quality.

V. The commanding officers of depots will receive and distribute any articles of clothing or comfort which may be sent to the prisoners by their friends and will permit them to receive from and transmit to their friends open letters which must be inspected by a proper officer. Receipts must be signed for all articles delivered and filed as evidence of such delivery. Money sent by friends should not be delivered to prisoners except in small quantities. An account should be kept of all such funds and they should be disbursed upon orders from the prisoners to whom they belong. When a prisoner is exchanged or released he will be paid the balance due him.

VI. Their chaplains will be allowed free intercourse with the prisoners to give them religious instruction. Those who may die will be decently buried in the usual burying-grounds and a proper mark be affixed to the graves. Every measure will be adopted to ensure the safe custody of the prisoners, but at the same time they should receive such treatment as enlightened humanity prompts and the circumstances of the case permit. Their friends will be permitted to visit them only when the commanding officer may deem it safe and proper and then under such regulations as he may adopt.

VII. Monthly reports must be made to these headquarters with full lists of the prisoners, noting all changes during the month-whether exchanged, released on parole, died, discharged, &c.

VIII. Special instructions with regard to the military prison at Alton have been given to the commanding officer at that post.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, March 1, 1862.

Brig. Gen. L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General of the Army, Washington.

GENERAL: I inclose herewith a letter* from Colonel Mulligan. If recruiting is allowable from prisoners of war a considerable number can be obtained in a short time. Please answer.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Not found.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, March 1, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Commanding Department of the Missouri, Saint Louis.

GENERAL: The board of assessment organized pursuant to General Orders, No. 24, series of 1861,* from your headquarters, and further organized pursuant to Special Orders, No. 18, current series, for the {p.171} purpose of laying an assessment of $10,000 upon the friends of the enemy for the benefit of the refugees driven by the rebels from Southwest Missouri beg leave respectfully to present this their final report:

Total amount of assessments laid$16,340.00
Total assessments remitted$3,715.00
Total assessments “no property found”2,000.00
5,715.00
Net assessments10,625.00
Total penalties for failure to pay1,262.50
Balance11,887.50

The amount thus assessed has been for the use of the refugees or by voluntary and forced payments of money, &c., as follows:

Provisions$1,500.00
Voluntary payments in cash2,850.00
Forced payments by sales6,563.45
Deficiencies not collected or collectible974.05
Balance11,887.50

Of the amount thus raised the provisions have been turned over to the authorized agents of the Western Sanitary Commission for distribution and the cash realized has been deposited with the assistant treasurer of the United States at Saint Louis to the credit of the provost-marshal-general, from which is drawn from time to time the necessary means to meet the bills contracted by and certified to by the said agents. As to the details of such expenditures the board respectfully refer you to the commission. Gross assessments amounted to a considerable sum above the $10,000 ordered to be raised, but the board found it necessary to adopt such a course in order to realize the $10,000 after deducting such assessments as ought properly to be remitted and making allowances for such defaulters as had no ostensible means from which to make the amount by levy and sale. The board therefore respectfully request that a special order may be made covering the entire assessment, legalizing the acts of the board and discharging them from further duty in connection with the matter.

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

* See p. 150.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 51.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis March 3, 1862.

By direction of Major-General McClellan the following tariff of exchange of prisoners of war adopted between the United States and Great Britain in the war of 1812 is substituted for that given in General Orders, No. 30, current series:

General commanding in chief or admiral, sixty men.

Lieutenant-general or vice-admiral, forty men.

Major-general or rear-admiral, thirty men.

Brigadier-general or commodore, with a broad pennant and a captain under him, twenty men.

Colonel or captain of a line-of-battle ship, fifteen men.

Lieutenant-colonel or captain of a frigate, ten men.

Major or commander of a sloop-of-war, bomb-ketch, fire-ship, or packet, eight men.

Captain or lieutenant or master, six men.

{p.172}

Lieutenant or master’s mate, four men.

Sub-lieutenant or ensign, or midshipmen, warrant officers, masters of merchant vessels and captains of private armed vessels, three men.

Non-commissioned officers or lieutenants and mates of private armed vessels, mates of merchant vessels and all petty officers of ships of war, two men.

Private soldiers or seamen, one man.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

INDIANAPOLIS, March 4, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK:

A number of prisoners propose to take the oath of allegiance and enlist in our regiments. A large number from Tennessee ask to take the oath of allegiance and be discharged on parole. What will you have done?

O. P. MORTON, Governor of Indiana.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, St. Louis, March 4, 1862.

Col. J. A. MULLIGAN, Camp Douglas, Chicago:

The question of enlisting prisoners of war has been submitted to General McClellan and I await his answer.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, March 7, 1862.

Col. S. H. BOYD, Twenty-fourth Regiment Missouri Vols., Comdg. Post at Rolla.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of communications dated the 1st of March forwarded by Col. J. B. Wyman, and one of the 5th instant forwarded by you, in relation to an exchange of prisoners of war agreed upon by Lieutenant-Colonel Wood, Sixth Missouri Cavalry, and Colonel Coleman, of the Confederate Army, which agreement proposes the exchange of John W. Carlin, Company A [G], and Martin G. Skaggs, Company E [K], Sixth Missouri Cavalry, or Silas Hendrick and John F. Downing, of Coleman’s regiment, Confederate Army.

The major-general commanding directs that the exchange will be made. Brig. Gen. J. M. Schofield, commanding District of Saint Louis, will send the two men-Skaggs and Downing-with a suitable escort to Rolla.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. H. McLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

{p.173}

–––

POCAHONTAS, March 8, 1862.

Col. W. P. CARLIN, U. S. Army, Commandant, Ironton, Mo.

COLONEL: Upon my arrival here last evening I was mortified and grieved to learn of the misunderstanding or misconduct of Captain Higdon of the Third Regiment Missouri State Guard. You have seen enough of the man to know his measure, but at the same time I must assure you that had I known the facts in the case he would not have had the opportunity to place us in such an awkward position.

I really believe, however, colonel, that Higdon honestly believed himself to be exchanged, for if I remember aright (not having my letter-book with me) I wrote to you in answer to the communication by Higdon that I had written to General Halleck proposing a general exchange. This letter was sent through Colonel Ross at Cape Girardeau. And upon my return from Richmond last month I found your communication through Captain Elliott which I immediately answered, inclosing a general order releasing all captured by me on the Iron Mountain Railroad. This last letter I sent through General Polk by flag of truce to Cairo.

From these various communications Higdon has been either led to believe that he has been exchanged or he has cowardly shrunk from performing a sacred duty and should be held responsible; but, colonel, as he asserts so positively his innocent intentions, as he is suffering so severely from a broken arm (recently broken) and as he is hardly worth making an example of I have thought I would not send him up until I hear from you again, when if you desire him you shall have him if he can be found in the Confederacy.

I wrote to Colonel Ross some weeks ago to know in what light you hold the disbanded soldiers of the Missouri State Guard who have been taken prisoners-whether as citizens or as soldiers-but have received no answer. I would be pleased to hear from you on the subject. Any communication addressed to me at this place, or Bloomfield or New Madrid, at your convenience, will reach me, as I will vibrate for a week or two.

Yours, most respectfully,

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Missouri State Guard.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, March 8, 1862.

Major HUNT, Hannibal, Mo.

MAJOR: Herewith you will find a special order* for arrest of certain parties in Ralls County. Have them brought before you and if you see proper parole them with the liberty of your city. General Halleck’s order punishes all such parties. I would suggest that it is only desirable to get all secessionists or sympathizers out of office and place, and if they will resign and allow the governor to fill their places with loyal men they might avoid or avert the punishment for their violation of the order of General Halleck. The sheriff of Ralls County ought to be got rid of. The papers I have do not give his name. I will refer the matter of declaring the offices vacant to the governor. It is desirable and you are instructed to exercise your own judgment and discretion in the arrest and release of prisoners.

{p.174}

As a general rule release those who are not guilty of irregular warfare or other violations of rules of war, burning bridges, &c., upon taking oath and giving bond with good security. Such as are clearly guilty of robbing and other offenses against law where the evidence is clear, turn them over to the officers of the law and make them do their duty. Do not hesitate to assume any responsibility your judgment may dictate as necessary to thwart any plan of secessionists or to wrest from them any power they have civil or otherwise. They have first discarded law and have appealed to force. It is now purely a question of power not one of law. Do not hesitate to seize and hold their property. Where there is no law there is no property. If they deny the power of the Government they are without law and let them feel the consequences. We cannot temporize with them. Your extensive acquaintance will enable you to get at the facts in regard to the disloyal people in your section and enable you to dispose of them in the manner best calculated to produce good results.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

* Not found.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., March 10, 1862.

Col. JAMES A. MULLIGAN, Chicago, Ill.

COLONEL: As the War Department does not answer my letter in relation to your enlisting prisoners of war I shall take the responsibility of authorizing you to immediately fill up your regiments in that way. Great caution, however, must be used as to the character of the persons so enlisted. You should make yourself personally acquainted with the history of each recruit received and exercise a sound discretion in the matter. The recruits should be sent to Benton Barracks where the regiment will be prepared for the field in Arkansas. I do not think it would be advisable to send them to Tennessee or Mississippi. In Arkansas they will meet none of their old associates.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., March 15, 1862.

Col. JAMES A. MULLIGAN, Chicago, Ill.

COLONEL: I have just received instructions from the War Department not to permit the enlistment of prisoners of war. You will be governed by these instructions.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSISSIPPI, Saint Louis, March 18, 1862.

Brig. Gen. FRED. STEELE, Commanding District of Southeast Missouri, Pilot Knob.

GENERAL: In reply to your letter of the 14th instant I have the honor to inclose herewith copies of General Orders, [Nos.] 30 and 51, current series, from these headquarters, the latter giving the tariff of {p.175} exchange of prisoners of war to be substituted for that given in the former. I am instructed by the major-general commanding to say that complying with the requirements of said orders you are authorized to make actual personal exchanges; that where the enemy returns prisoners within our lines you will return within his lines the prescribed number of the proper grade. Where you have not the prisoners to return they will on your application be furnished from here.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Cape Girardeau, Mo., March 24, 1862.

Brig. Gen. J. M. SCHOFIELD, Commanding Missouri State Militia, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: Since my last I have to report that in and immediately around Cape Girardeau is quiet and peaceable. In the large scope of country including Bollinger, Scott, Stoddard and Dunklin and a portion of Cape Girardeau Counties small bands of secessionists are moving about committing depredations. There are seven men belonging to my battalion who were absent on sick leave and were captured by these men, who seem to be still under command of M. Jeff. Thompson. One of the seven was killed while resisting. One of the prisoners has been returned with a letter* from M. Jeff. Thompson which I herewith inclose. Owing to a circumstance which I will hereafter report I cannot comply with the request made in said letter but there are fourteen commissioned officers who are on their parole of honor, and I have written to the commanding officer stating that I would release two captains and two lieutenants for the seven men that they have belonging to me.

You will see by the inclosed letter that Brig. Gen. M. Jeff. Thompson is still in command of a body of troops. The man who brought the letter says he saw and spoke to him twenty-five miles below Bloomfield. He could not ascertain the amount of force under him but I should suppose from the locality in which he was found and other circumstances he may have about 1,000 men. Should exigency require it will I telegraph to your headquarters for help, or will I send down to General Strong at Cairo?

I have to report also that nine prisoners confined in guard-house escaped on the night of 23d instant by means of a rope which had been used to tie an unruly soldier and was improperly left in the room. I have a detail of men in pursuit.

I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant,

LINDSAY MURDOCH, Captain, Missouri State Militia, Commanding Post.

* Not found.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSISSIPPI, Saint Louis, March 25, 1862.

COMMANDING OFFICER, Glasgow, Mo.:

It has been brought to the knowledge of the commanding general that one Caples, a prisoner on parole, whose teachings and example has been productive of much trouble in Chariton, Saline and Howard {p.176} Counties has appointed to preach at Glasgow on the 29th and 30th instant. The mischief wrought by this man has been so great and so fully proven to me that in the absence of any order on the subject from headquarters I cannot hesitate to do what I feel to be a duty to the Government and to exercise a right with which my office invests me. In the absence of any local provost-marshal at Glasgow to whom I would address a formal order on the subject I have to request you to inform Mr. Caples that I forbid his exercising in any manner the functions of a preacher or public speaker in the counties of Saline, Chariton and Howard until further orders. This he will regard as an order any violation of which will incur the penalties of resistance to military orders on his part. I have abundance of evidence that the peace and well-being of that section of country requires this course toward Mr. Caples and hope you will concur in this view and enforce obedience on his part to this order.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS FIRST DIVISION, ARMY OF THE WEST, Van Buren, March 26, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK, Commanding Department of the Mississippi.

GENERAL: I desire to call your attention very respectfully to the fact that whilst I forthwith released upon their paroles and oaths more than 3,500 officers and men who were taken prisoners by me at Lexington you hold a large number of the officers and men of the Missouri State Guard and many citizens of Missouri in close confinement at Saint Louis, Alton and elsewhere, and that the men thus held by you are suffering greatly by reason of such unjust confinement.

I hope, general, that you will be pleased to imitate the example which I furnished so long ago, and have the honor to be, most respectfully, your obedient servant,

STERLING PRICE, Major-General, Commanding First Division, Army of the West.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., March 28, 1862.

Capt. H. H. HEATH, Provost-Marshal, Clinton, Mo.

CAPTAIN: As a general rule you will require all persons who have been in arms against the Government of the United States to take the oath and give a bond for $1,000. This rule applies only to those who have been in regular service. Such as have been guilty of irregular or illegal warfare you will hold for trial before a military commission, sending copy of evidence in each case to this office. Those who have a pass from provost-marshal at Springfield will not be detained. I presume he only gives such passes in cases where the party has complied with usual terms for returning to his allegiance.

In all things not governed by general orders exercise your own discretion after obtaining all the facts. In such cases your opportunities to know and judge of the circumstances of each case will better enable you to decide than I possibly could.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

B. G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

{p.177}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 13.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSISSIPPI, Saint Louis, March 30, 1862.

I. Commanders of army corps, divisions and brigades and of military districts where their commands are equal to a brigade are authorized to order military commissions to try offenses against the laws of war which are not triable by general court-martial. But all sentences of such commissions extending to loss of life, or confiscation of property, or imprisonment exceeding the term of thirty days must be confirmed by the commanding general of the department.

II. The attention of all such commanders and of all officers of military commissions is called to General Orders, No. 1, of 1862, Department of the Missouri, in relation to the powers and duties of commissions as distinguished from courts-martial.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, April 3, 1862.

WILLIAM M. MCPHERSON, Esq., Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: Your letter of this date is received.* In answer to your inquiries I have to state that persons in arms against the United States under General Price can be received only as prisoners of war and that they will be treated in the same kind and lenient manner as others have been who are willing to abandon a hopeless and unholy cause, take the prescribed oath of allegiance and give satisfactory security for their future good conduct.

Any one who voluntarily takes the oath and gives his parole of honor and afterward violates it by aiding or abetting the enemy will most certainly be executed. A man who violates his military parole commits the most serious of all military offenses and I will pardon no one who is guilty of that crime.

In regard to the wife of the reverend captain chaplain in General Price’s army who wishes permission to visit her husband please inform her that no such permission can be granted. Nearly all the secessionists of this State who have entered the rebel service have left their wives and daughters to the care of the Federal troops. There is scarcely a single instance where this confidence has been abused by us. But what return have, these ladies made for this protection? In many cases they have acted as spies and informers for the enemy and have been most loud-mouthed in their abuse of our cause and most insulting in their conduct toward those who support it. Under any other government they would for such conduct be expelled from the country or confined within the walls of a prison.

I am well aware that some good Union men in the interior of the State think that those now serving the rebel cause under General Price should be permitted to return to their homes without being considered prisoners of war or when taken prisoners of war that they should be released simply on promise of future good conduct. Experience has satisfied me that such a course would neither be wise nor safe. Indeed I find that the very persons who advocate a more lenient policy toward

* Not found. {p.178} returned secessionists are also continually petitioning to have additional troops sent to their counties to protect them from the operations of these same rebels.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S OFFICE, April 16, 1862.

JAMES O. BROADHEAD, U. S. District Attorney, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: Since writing you yesterday I received yours* of the 12th asking for official assistance. Certainly you must have the needful aid and I shall take your judgment of the necessity. Your assistant must be a capable, good lawyer or he will be of little use. Name your man therefore and I will allow a fair and liberal compensation, avoiding alike extravagance and meanness. From my letter of yesterday I think you will understand the drift of my policy in the matter of prosecutions. I would use indictments for treason sparingly especially against small men. There are some magnates, however, who are not now in the State and may never be there again against whom a pending indictment for treason might be made useful in the future. Such (for instance only) as Generals Polk and Pillow, of Tennessee; Pike, of Arkansas; Van Dorn, Clark, Parsons, Reid, &c., of Missouri; of course not forgetting Price, Jackson, and Thompson. When the war is mainly over it may be a good thing to have that hold upon them wherever they may then be.

Very respectfully,

EDWARD BATES.

* Not found.

–––

WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington City, D. C., May 27, 1862.

General SCHOFIELD, Commanding, Saint Louis:

The President has received information that Washington Adams and Andrew Adams, of Boonville, have been arrested and are held in custody by the provost-marshal of Boonville without any sufficient cause. He desires that they be released if there be no sufficient cause to the contrary, and if they be not released that the cause for holding them in custody or requiring them to give bonds be communicated immediately to this Department. Your prompt attention to this subject is requested.

EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War.

CONFEDERATE CORRESPONDENCE.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., May 5, 1861.

General S. PRICE, Commanding State Militia.

DEAR SIR: I leave this city on Friday next with several men. You may need our services in Jefferson City; if so Missouri holds on me the first claim, consequently I tender you that service.

{p.179}

Information from a reliable source forces the conviction upon me that the agreement entered into by General Harney and yourself is at present null and void. Preparations are now being made for a crusade on Missouri. To defend her laws and liberties I pledge you the force under my control.

Being strangers to each otter any instructions you may desire to convey to me touching the matter you can send to any of your friends who will find me at the Everett House in this city.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

WM. H. KIDD.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MCCULLOCH’S BRIGADE, Camp on Buffalo Creek, Mo., July 5, 1861.

Hon. L. P. WALKER, Secretary of War.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit the inclosed report detailing an account of the taking of the town of Neosho, Mo., by a part of my brigade and of the surrender to them of eighty men with their arms, &c. I am now within about twenty-five miles of the governor of the State who I learn has been fighting his way to me during the day. I will push a portion of my force (now nearly 4,000 men) as near to him as possible to-morrow and do all in my power to relieve him. It will depend upon his fate what my future movements may be. My great object in coming into the State has been to relieve the governor and the force under him. I will again inform you of my whereabouts in the course of a few days.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

BEN. McCULLOCH, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

HEADQUARTERS MCCULLOCH’S BRIGADE, Camp at Barlin’s Mill, July 5, 1861.

Brig. Gen. BEN. MCCULLOCH, Commanding Brigade, Camp on Buffalo Creek, Mo.

GENERAL: I have the honor to inform you that in obedience to your orders I started at 11 a.m. to-day with four companies of Colonel Churchill’s regiment of Arkansas Mounted Riflemen and Captain Carroll’s company of Arkansas State troops to make an attack upon some Federal troops at Neosho, Mo., in conjunction with Colonel Churchill, commanding six companies of his regiment. We started on different roads which entered the town-one from the west, the other from the south-with an arrangement to make the march of sixteen miles in four hours and upon entering the town to make a simultaneous attack. I found that the distance was not so much as stated. It would therefore be necessary for me to have waited near the town an hour, and fearing that information would be carried into town to the enemy I determined to attack at once and made my arrangements accordingly. I dismounted the four companies of Churchill’s regiment about a quarter of a mile of the town and marched them by platoon at double-quick within 200 yards of the court-house, where we found a company eighty strong. I sent Captain Carroll with his company to make a détour and to take them in rear.

{p.180}

After halting my command I sent Doctor Armstrong, volunteer aide-de-camp, to demand a surrender of the forces. I allowed them ten minutes to decide. At the end of the time the captain in command made an unconditional surrender of the company, laying down their arms and side-arms. We took 100 rifles with saber bayonets, a quantity of ammunition and a train of seven wagons loaded with provisions. Colonel Churchill came up in good time with his command and made an imposing sight with his mounted riflemen.

The officers and men did everything in their power to make the movement as prompt as possible, and they marched up to within a short distance of a force whose numbers were unknown with a step as regular and a front as unbroken as a body of veterans.

I have the honor to be, general, your obedient servant,

JAMES MCINTOSH, Captain, C. S. Army, and Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MCCULLOCH’S BRIGADE, Camp Jackson, Ark., July 9, 1861.

Hon. L. P. WALKER, Secretary of War, Richmond, Va.

SIR:

...

On the 5th instant I found from authentic information that if the governor was to be rescued by my command it was necessary to move with more celerity than the infantry and artillery could march. I therefore moved on with about 3,000 cavalry leaving the infantry and artillery in camp twenty-eight miles north of this camp. Upon arriving within twelve miles of Neosho I ascertained that the force had already left that place and marched north against the governor leaving a detachment in Neosho between 100 and 300 men. I immediately sent two columns of cavalry on different roads to capture the detachment-one column of six companies under Colonel Churchill, and another under Captain McIntosh of five companies. The movement was entirely successful and 137 prisoners fell into my hands, with 150 stand of arms, 1 color, 7 wagons (loaded with subsistence stores) and an ambulance. In the hurry of reporting this affair I made the amount of property and prisoners captured less than it actually was. ...

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

BEN. MCCULLOCH, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

PROCLAMATION.

JEFFERSON CITY, August 20, 1861.

To THE PEOPLE OF MISSOURI:

FELLOW-CITIZENS: The army under my command has been organized under the laws of the State for the protection of your homes and firesides and for the maintenance of the rights, dignity and honor of Missouri.

It is kept in the field for these purposes alone, and to aid in accomplishing them our gallant Southern brethren have come into our State with these. We have achieved a glorious victory* over the foe, and {p.181} scattered far and wide the well-appointed army which the usurper at Washington has been more than six months gathering for your subjugation and enslavement.

This victory frees a large portion of the State from the powers of the invaders and restores it to the protection of its army. It consequently becomes my duty to assure you that it is my firm determination to protect every peaceable citizen in the full enjoyment of all his right whatever may have been his sympathies in the present unhappy struggle, if he has not taken an active part in the cruel warfare which has been waged against the good people of this State by the ruthless enemies whom we have just defeated.

I therefore invite all good citizens to return to their homes and the practice of their ordinary avocations with the full assurance that they, their families, their homes and their property shall be carefully protected. I at the same time warn all evil-disposed persons who may support the usurpations of any one claiming to be provisional or temporary governor of Missouri or who shall in any other way give aid or comfort to the enemy that they will be held as enemies and treated accordingly.

STERLING PRICE, Major-General, Commanding Missouri State Guard.

* Probably has reference to the battle of Wilson’s Creek, August 10, 1861. See Series I, Vol III, pp. 54-130, for official reports of this action.

–––

PROCLAMATION.

HDQRS. FIRST MILITARY DIST., MISSOURI STATE GUARD, Camp Hunter, September 2, 1861.

To WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

Whereas, Maj. Gen. John C. Frémont, commanding the minions of Abraham Lincoln in the State of Missouri, has seen fit to declare martial law* throughout the whole State and has threatened to shoot any citizen soldier found in arms within certain limits, also to confiscate the property and free the negroes belonging to the members of the Missouri State Guard: therefore, know ye that I, M. Jeff. Thompson, brigadier-general of the First Military District of Missouri, having not only the military authority of brigadier-general but certain police powers granted by Acting Governor Thomas C. Reynolds and confirmed afterward by Governor Jackson do most solemnly promise that for every member of the Missouri State Guard or soldier of our allies the armies of the Confederate States who shall be put to death in pursuance of said order of General Frémont I will hang, draw and quarter a minion of said Abraham Lincoln.

While I am anxious that this unfortunate war shall be conducted if possible upon the most liberal principles of civilized warfare and every order that I have issued has been with that object yet if this rule is to be adopted (and it must first be done by our enemies) I intend to exceed General Frémont in his excesses and will make all tories that come in my reach rue the day that a different policy was adopted by their leaders. Already mills, barns, warehouses and other private property have been wastefully and wantonly destroyed by the enemy in this district while we have taken nothing except articles strictly contraband or absolutely necessary. Should these things be repeated I will retaliate ten-fold, so help me God.

M. JEFF. THOMPSON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* See Frémont’s Proclamation, p. 221.

{p.182}

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE GUARD, Camp Wallace, Lexington, Mo., September 21, 1861.

Hon. C. F. JACKSON, Governor of the State of Missouri:

I have the honor to submit to Your Excellency the following report of the action which terminated on the 20th instant with the surrender of the U. S. forces and property at this place to the army under my command:

After chastising the marauding armies of Lane and Montgomery and driving them out of the State and after compelling them to abandon Fort Scott as detailed in my last report I continued my march toward this point with an army increasing hourly in numbers and enthusiasm.

...

After 2 o’clock in the afternoon of the 20th and after fifty-two hours of continuous firing a white flag was displayed by the enemy on that part of the works nearest to Colonel Green’s position, and shortly afterward another was displayed opposite to Colonel Rives’. I immediately ordered a cessation of all firing on our part and sent forward one of my staff officers to ascertain the object of the flag and to open negotiations with the enemy, if such should be their desire. It was finally after some delay agreed by Colonel Marshall and the officers associated with him for that purpose by Colonel Mulligan that the United States forces should lay down their arms and surrender themselves as prisoners of war to this army. These terms having been made known were ratified by me and immediately carried into effect.

Our entire loss in this series of engagements amounts to 25 killed and 72 wounded. The enemy’s loss was much greater.

The visible fruits of this almost bloodless victory are very great-about 3,500 prisoners, among whom are Colonels Mulligan, Marshall, Peabody, White and Grover, Major Van Horn, and 118 other commissioned officers, 5 pieces of artillery and 2 mortars, over 3,000 stand of infantry arms, a large number of sabers, about 750 horses, many sets of cavalry equipments, wagons, teams, and ammunition, more than $100,000 worth of commissary stores and a large amount of other property. In addition to all this I obtained the restoration of the great seal of the State and the public records which had been stolen from their proper custodian, and about $900,000 in money of which the bank at this place had been robbed and which I have caused to be returned to it.

...

I have the honor to be, with the greatest respect, Your Excellency’s obedient servant,

STERLING PRICE, Major-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Memphis, Tenn., November 17, 1861.

Col. W. W. MACKALL, Assistant Adjutant-General.

COLONEL: I have the honor to report the arrival on November 15, 1861, from Columbus of 99 prisoners taken at the battle of Belmont on 7th of November. There are 93 privates, 4 commissioned officers, 1 orderly sergeant and 1 wagon-master. They were brought to Memphis {p.183} on steamer Ingomar, under command of Captain Dresden’s company Louisiana volunteers. Upon their arrival they were taken charge of by me and marched in order to a large cotton warehouse which had been selected the day previous. The owner of the cotton warehouse objects so much to their occupying his house that I have determined to move them as soon as possible to a more convenient and equally secure place. They will have ample room as the building has a large yard, surrounded by high, thick walls. There is a guard of twenty-four privates, two commissioned officers and three non-commissioned officers, all taken from the home guard, relieved every twenty-four hours.

It will be my endeavor to make them as comfortable as possible. Rations will be furnished by the Government for their subsistence, doing their own cooking. A servant will be supplied to wait on the officers. There are now three companies of home guard organized as a guard, members of which all have families and subsist themselves. What will they be allowed for their services? A great many of them depend upon their labor for a support.

I am, colonel, very respectfully,

JOHN ADAMS, Captain of Cavalry, C. S. Army, Commanding Post.

–––

Statement of Dr. William W. Griswold, of Warren County, Mo.

I entered into the service of the medical department of the Missouri State Guard on the 14th of August, 1861, as an assistant surgeon in the hospital located in the brick female seminary at Springfield, Mo., in which were placed the wounded of two brigades of the Eighth Division of the Missouri State Guard. I assisted there until General Rains moved. I left with the division. At Stockton the general desired a courier northward; wishing to go to Henry County I volunteered my services, which were accepted.

I rejoined the army ere the battle of Dry Wood and assisted in attending to the wounded on that day. When the army moved on Lexington I was detailed (by Doctor Taylor, the brigade surgeon) to take charge of the wounded and remove them to Greenfield, in Dade County, Mo., with orders to there establish a hospital. On my arrival at that place with the wounded I found a hospital already established, to which was attached a surgeon. I turned my patients over to him and returned to the army at Lexington. Again occupied my former position and attended the sick of the brigade. I stayed with the army until it crossed the Osage on its retreat. The army needing medicines which we could not procure in Southwest Missouri, and Colonel Boone wishing me to go with him to the north side of the Missouri River I obtained permission to go. Doctor Snodgrass, surgeon-general, however, ordered me to purchase all of certain articles of medicine then needed that I could get and send to the army.

Colonel Boone not succeeding in organizing the men he expected to I again returned to the army which was then near Greenfield, in Dade County. Colonel Boone received fresh orders and I was requested to attend him for the purpose of taking charge of the medical direction of the troops expected to be raised by him and assist in bringing them to the main army, my intimate knowledge with the country being of service to Colonel Boone.

{p.184}

I arrived in Callaway County in November, 1861. Assisted in organizing several companies. Moved east into Warren County for the same purpose in December. Was there taken sick and by the time I was in condition to travel my retreat was cut off by the Federal troops. I lay in the woods and out-of-the-way places during the balance of the winter. The 1st of April started again to make my way to the army.

On the 2d after traveling a few miles I was taken with the ague, and whilst sick surrounded and taken by the State militia from Danville, Montgomery County; taken to that place; incarcerated in a cell and ironed; taken out three times per day and paraded as a spectacle-a notorious and infamous secessionist. After keeping me in irons for a week or so the irons were taken off but I was kept confined in the cell until my removal to Mexico, Audrain County. There I was kept for five or six weeks. At the end of that time the farce of a trial was gone through with. I was not allowed any witness neither was I permitted to ask any question of theirs that would tend to invalidate their testimony. Nevertheless the commission could find nothing against me. I not being permitted witnesses that I desired refused to make any statement.

On my arrival in Saint Louis I there found officers who were with me in the army and by whom I could establish my position. I then wrote to the provost-marshal-general of the District of Missouri demanding an unconditional release as a surgeon of the Missouri State Guard. After a week or two his assistant sent for me. I reiterated my demand and offered to produce the evidence. He remanded me to prison. I then wrote to General Schofield twice, then to Washington City, then to the assistant provost-marshal-general at Saint Louis. The assistant requested me to send my evidence. I sent him my certificates which he retains and refuses to return. I have written to him three times for them but cannot get them. I was transferred from Saint Louis to Alton.

At each and every prison at which I have been confined I have been compelled to attend to the sick. At this place I have the choice of a cell or attention to the sick and wounded.

Yours, respectfully,

WM. W. GRISWOLD, Of Warren County, Mo.

–––

Union Methods of Dealing with Guerrillas and the Lawless Elements of Missouri.

ADJUTANT-GENERAL’S OFFICE, Washington, May 27, 1861.

Brig. Gen. W. S. HARNEY, Commanding Department of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: The President observes with concern notwithstanding the pledge of the State authorities to co-operate in preserving peace in Missouri that loyal citizens in great numbers continue to be driven from their homes. It is immaterial whether these outrages continue from inability or indisposition on the part of the State authorities to prevent them. It is enough that they continue to devolve on you the duty of putting a stop to them summarily by the force under your command to be aided by such troops as you may require from Kansas, Iowa and {p.185} Illinois. The professions of loyalty to the Union by the State authorities of Missouri are not to be relied upon. They have already falsified their professions too often and are too far committed to secession to be entitled to your confidence, and you can only be sure of their desisting from their wicked purposes when it is out of their power to prosecute them. You will therefore be unceasingly watchful of their movements and not permit the clamors of their partisans and opponents of the wise measures already taken to prevent you from checking every movement against the Government however disguised under the pretended State authority. The authority of the United States is paramount and whenever it is apparent that a movement whether by color of State authority or not is hostile you will not hesitate to put it down.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, June 13, 1861.

General L. THOMAS:

Telegraph lines have been destroyed near Jefferson City by party from there thus cutting off all direct communication with the West. The governor has caused the Gasconade bridge to be burned. Telegraph lines from Quincy east but none between these places.

N. LYON, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS BRIGADE, Quincy, July 14, 1861.

Col. J. M. PALMER, Fourteenth [Illinois] Regiment.

SIR: Your regiment is ordered back to-morrow to be joined by Colonel Grant’s, who will bring you detailed orders and meet you at Palmyra. I regret to learn that disorder and depredations have marked the Sixteenth Regiment in Missouri. As senior colonel you will repress this at all hazards. No violence or robbery, no insults to women and children, no wanton destruction of property will be tolerated. License must be repressed by the sharpest remedies and any officer who permits or encourages will lose his commission.

Yours,

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers.

P. S.-I cannot leave headquarters until my other regiment comes on Monday night and get them into camp.

–––

HEADQUARTERS BRIGADE, Quincy, July 14, 1861.

Colonel SMITH, Sixteenth Illinois.

SIR: No depredations will be tolerated in property. Strict order will be preserved at the peril of officers and men. Give receipts at once for all that you take and take nothing that you do not want. Report {p.186} to me at once any violation of discipline in these or other respects. I fear from reports that have reached me that violence and misrule have some scope in the Sixteenth Regiment. This must be put down at all hazards.

Yours,

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 2.}

BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS, Quincy, Ill., July 16, 1861.

1. The general in command requires of all troops serving in Missouri strict obedience to the following directions for their conduct: No man is to be arrested or detained for mere expression of opinion. No interference with women, no breaking into houses or stores, no unauthorized seizures or destruction of private property will be tolerated, but every person so offending will be dealt with in pursuance of articles 32 and 54 of the Articles of War. ...

2. If any person shall be detected by guards in the act of taking up track, removing rails, ties or spikes, placing obstructions on road or burning or injuring property necessary for the orderly running of the road the guard will immediately arrest all such persons, and if they escape arrest fire upon them.

...

10. If sworn information by reliable men is furnished that any person is engaged or has been engaged in raising troops destined to act against the United States, or has accepted service in any such force, or has knowingly and without compulsion furnished horses, provisions or money or any article to assist and aid such, or if any person shall be actually found in such service by any officer or private of the U. S. troops they will be immediately apprehended for treason, and after preliminary investigation if in the judgment of any field officer there is cause to hold them for trial they will be sent to brigade headquarters with a statement of the facts and a list of the witnesses, but all examining officers will exercise extreme care and discrimination and not confound the innocent with the guilty, and exercise a just discretion.

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers.

–––

BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS, Quincy, July 16, 1861.

Col. J. B. TURCHIN, Nineteenth [Illinois] Regiment.

SIR: The Nineteenth have now an opportunity of establishing a reputation for orderly and soldier-like behavior. I have no fears for their reputation for courage and gallantry. I regret that I have reliable information that they violate private rights of property and of person. This must be stopped at once. I call your attention to the Articles of War, sections 32 and 54, and shall require implicit obedience. The regiment must not be permitted to make friends into enemies and injure the cause of the Nation while in its service by excesses and violence. Peaceable citizens must be protected; offenders against such must be punished. You will cause strict inquiry to be made and where {p.187} damage has been done settle the amount and deduct from the offender’s pay. In addition to this military punishment adequate to the offense will be inflicted even to the extent of ignominious discharge from the service. Prompt obedience and orderly behavior must be preserved. I send you in a private letter the facts which I require to be examined into and desire a report. If you are compelled by military necessity to take horses or transportation or any other private property let it be done by competent officers and reported to you, and let the cause of such taking, the property taken, the value and the owner’s name be entered on the regimental books and proper vouchers given to the owners. Your regiment by careful and orderly conduct can make hosts of friends, and I trust that the high opinion which I have of the officers may not be lowered by their misconduct in any way.

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General Illinois Volunteer Militia.

–––

ASTOR HOUSE, NEW YORK, July 18, 1861.

Colonel TOWNSEND, Assistant Adjutant-General:

North Missouri Railroad torn up and obstructed by State forces. Mails cannot be transported. Track torn up behind the United States troops. Some fighting between these and State forces. I have ordered General Pope to take the command in North Missouri with three regiments from Alton. He moves this morning. General Lyon calls for re-enforcements.

J. U. FRÉMONT, Major-General, Commanding.

–––

PROCLAMATION.

SAINT CHARLES, MO., July 19, 1861.

To THE PEOPLE OF NORTH MISSOURI:

By virtue of proper authority I have assumed the command in North Missouri. I appear among you with force strong enough to maintain the authority of the Government and too strong to be resisted by any means in your possession usual in warfare. Upon your own assurances that you would respect the laws of the United States and preserve peace no troops have hitherto been sent in your section of the country. The occurrences of the last ten days have plainly exhibited that you lack either the power or the inclination to fulfill your pledges and the Government has therefore found it necessary to occupy North Missouri with a force large enough to compel obedience to the laws. So soon as it is made manifest that you will respect its authority and put down unlawful combinations against it you will be relieved of the presence of the forces under my command, but not till then.

I therefore warn all persons taken in arms against the Federal authority who attempt to commit depredation upon the public or private property or who molest unoffending and peaceful citizens that they will be dealt with in the most summary manner without awaiting civil process.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army, Commanding.

{p.188}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 4.}

BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS, Hudson City, July 19, 1861.

For the purpose of more orderly and satisfactory control of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad and the maintenance of the various important points that road will be divided into two divisions and four sections. The first division will extend from Saint Joseph to Brookfield; the second division from Brookfield to the Mississippi River at Hannibal and Quincy.

The first section of the road will extend from Saint Joseph to Hamilton, and will be held by the Second Iowa Regiment, Lieutenant-Colonel Tuttle, headquarters at Saint Joseph. The second section from Hamilton to Brookfield will be held by the Third Iowa Regiment, headquarters at Chillicothe. The third section from Brookfield to Salt River will be held by the Sixteenth Illinois, Col. R. F. Smith, headquarters at Hudson City. The fourth section from Salt River to Hannibal and Quincy will be held by the Fourteenth Illinois Regiment, headquarters at Palmyra.

Each regiment will gradually draw in within its own lines as fast as relieved by the appropriate force and keep communication at least daily from each post to headquarters of regiment. Reasonable force will always be held at headquarters to assist any post in case of attack or for scouting duty. One company of Third Iowa will occupy Brookfield and will be joined by one company from Sixteenth Illinois, after which that point will be held jointly by the two companies. Detail of movements to make necessary changes will be ordered by Colonel Williams within the first division and Colonel Thomas in the second under directions from the brigadier-general.

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army, Commanding Line of Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad.

–––

HUDSON CITY, July 19, 1861.

Colonel SMITH, Missouri Volunteers.

SIR: By telegraphic orders from Brigadier-General Pope, now commanding in chief in North Missouri, I moved from Quincy yesterday morning at 10 o’clock; took up Grant’s regiment, Twenty-first Illinois, 840 strong, and have here in addition 400 of Colonel Palmer’s (Fourteenth Illinois). I took possession of this end of the road last night under reports of destruction of bridges and culverts. My orders were to open the road to Mexico and meet General Pope there to-day. Mr. Moulton, superintendent of the road, reports, with an engine, from you to-day that you need no further aid. I return the engine to you and send this by reliable messenger, and will hold my command until you return me message as to the state of things. This you can do by returning same engine, or in the most rapid manner, and send on communications to General Pope who should be at Saint Charles or on the road up.

Yours, respectfully,

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers.

{p.189}

–––

HUDSON CITY, July 19, 1861

GEORGE NASH, No. 40, under Planter’s House, Saint Louis, Mo.:

Shall go with train to-day. Conductor must bring out morning mail train. Inform President T. B. Moulton. Harris is moving about in timbered lands in Callaway County with from 800 to 1,200 horsemen. U. S. troops on foot in pursuit. Trains containing U. S. troops on North Missouri Railroad were fired into four times en route to Mexico. One U. S. soldier buried at Montgomery City and several wounded now in trains at Mexico. Two [of] State troops caught and shot. No prisoners. Press seized at Mexico and sheet put out by U. S. troops. Oath administered to many citizens. Doctor Bass, member of State convention, taken prisoner at his own house, and his horses and mules, and taken to Montgomery City but released next day on parole. Colonel McNeil is between Harris and the river. Lieutenant-Colonel Hammer is between the North Missouri Railroad and Harris. Neither party knows the enemy’s precise position. General Hurlbut and Colonel Palmer are at Hudson with about 1,800 troops; Colonel Smith is at Mexico with 3 locomotives, 60 or 70 cars and 400 men; says he does not want any more troops to assist in driving the enemy from the country. In addition to the above on the morning of the 18th forty U. S. cavalry, Hammer’s command, left Montgomery City for Mexico. Ten miles west of Wellsville they were attacked by State troops and driven back to Wellsville with loss of one horse killed and two wounded. They proceeded from this station by train to Mexico.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Charles, Mo., July 20, 1861.

By instructions from the general of division I have assumed command of all the forces in North Missouri. Upon receipt of this communication all commanders of forces along the line of North Missouri Railroad will send forward to this place the trains, locomotives and cars of every description in their possession or under their control. Commanders of regiments and detached corps will furnish at once a return of their commands, their stations and all other matters of moment.

[JOHN POPE,] Brigadier-General, U. S. Army, Commanding.

–––

NOTICE.

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Charles, July 21, 1861.

An investigation of the circumstances attending the difficulties along the line of the North Missouri Railroad and the wanton destruction of bridges, culverts, &c., makes it manifest that the inhabitants of the villages and stations along the road if not privy to these outrages at least offered no resistance to them and gave no information by which they could have been prevented or merited punishment inflicted upon the criminals.

{p.190}

I desire the people of this section of the State to understand distinctly that their safety and the security of their property will depend upon themselves, and are directly and inseparably connected with the security of the lines of public communication.

It is very certain that the people living along the line of the North Missouri Railroad can very easily protect it from destruction and it is my purpose to give them strong inducements to do so. I therefore notify the inhabitants of the towns, villages and stations along the line of this road that they will be held accountable for the destruction of any bridges, culverts or portions of the railroad track within five miles on each side of them. If any outrages of this kind are committed within the distance specified without conclusive proof of active resistance on the part of the population and without immediate information to the nearest commanding officer, giving names and details, the settlement will be held responsible and a levy of money or property sufficient to cover the whole damage done will be at once made and collected.

There seems to be no method of enlisting the active agency of the citizens along the line of this road for the protection of a public work in all respects so beneficial to them except by making it their very evident personal interest to do so, and I desire them to understand that they will be compelled to pay in full of property or money for any damage done in their vicinity. It has been impossible heretofore even to ascertain the names of the criminals engaged in this kind of work although they were well known to everybody in the neighborhood. If people who claim to be good citizens choose to indulge their neighbors and acquaintances in committing these wanton acts and to shield them from punishment they will hereafter be compelled to pay for it; or if they disapprove their objections must take more tangible form than mere words. It is not to be expected that the General Government will occupy a large force merely to protect from the people of this part of the State a work built for their own benefit, or to defend from outrages and hostility communities which encourage violations of all law by giving no information and by offering no sort of resistance. I therefore expect all law-abiding citizens at once to take measures to secure the safety of the North Missouri Railroad in their vicinity and I notify all others that upon the safety of the road depends the security of their own property and person. To carry out the intentions set forth above divisions and subdivisions of the road will be made as soon as practicable from these headquarters, and superintendents and assistant superintendents appointed by name without regard to political opinions who will be held responsible for the safety of the railroad track within their specified limits. They will have authority to call on all persons living within these limits to appear in Such numbers and at such times and places as they may deem necessary to secure the object in view. I expect all good citizens who value peace and the safety of their families and property to respond cheerfully to this arrangement and to assume to themselves the care and protection of their own section.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army, Commanding in North Missouri.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Charles, July 23, 1861.

His Excellency SAMUEL J. KIRKWOOD, Governor of Iowa.

SIR: Your letter to General Hurlbut with a communication from Colonel Bussey has been transmitted to me. In reply to it I have to {p.191} say that I most cordially accept the proffered aid in maintaining peace and quiet in those portions of North Missouri bordering on the Iowa line. In sending your State or other forces into Missouri be pleased to intrust their command to discreet and prudent officers, who should be directed to keep me advised of all their operations and who should inform me frequently of all matters of interest or importance connected with the condition of that region. It is not my purpose to make arrests for opinion’s sake but rather to force the people throughout this section to keep the peace among themselves and to keep open their own lines of public communication. It is impossible that the Federal Government can employ for any length of time so large a force merely to protect public works against destruction by those for whose benefit they were built, and it is my purpose to offer such inducements to the citizens of this State as will be sufficient to secure their own active agency in protecting their lines of railroad and other works of public convenience or necessity. I have published a notice to the people along the line of the North Missouri Railroad which I intend also to apply to the Hannibal and Saint Joe road based on these views, a copy* of which I herewith transmit. As I shall enforce the penalty to the letter I hope to see good results follow before many days.

Your active interference in North Missouri will I fear be very shortly necessary and in a stronger force than you suggest. The unfortunate repulse of our forces at Manassas has aroused the whole secession element in this State to renewed activity, and intelligence received this morning from Saint Louis has compelled me to suspend for the present further movements of the troops from this place in the direction of the Hannibal and Saint Joe road.

It is by no means improbable that I may be obliged within a few days to move the whole force in North Missouri into Saint Louis to protect that city from civil tumult and bloodshed, and in that case I shall call upon yourself and Governor Yates to replace them by State forces. I will communicate further with you in a day or two when affairs have assumed somewhat more definite shape.

I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant,

JOHN POPE, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army, Commanding in North Missouri.

* See “Notice,” p. 189.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, July 24, 1861.

Maj. Gen. J. C. FRÉMONT, Commanding Department of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: I have the honor to report that I reached this point to-day with the forces from Alton and assumed the command in North Missouri in compliance with your instructions. Everything is quiet and the road unobstructed. I transmit inclosed my proclamation* issued on the 19th instant, together with a public notice** which will explain itself. There seems to be no method of protecting the lines of public communication in this State and of preserving the peace except by forcing the population to understand that they peril their own safety of persons and property if they commit or allow to be committed without opposition any outbreaks against the law, and I have accordingly endeavored by such means as seem to me most efficacious to enlist the active agency of the population in the preservation of peace and good order. The persons to whom the charge of the various districts of the {p.192} road is committed have been selected from those of property and respectability without regard to political opinions; and I think that as soon as they can be made to realize that any disturbances among them, any combinations against the Government and any attempt to destroy the lines of railroad will lead to immediate reprisals upon themselves they will take such measures as will be necessary to prevent them. It requires but little effort on the part of the citizens of this section of country to preserve peace and order among themselves, and the moment they are furnished with such reasons for active interference as I have given them I do not doubt that all trouble will be at an end north of the Missouri River. I have applied the same system to all parts of North Missouri and will go forward in the morning to see them put in operation over the whole district. I am aware that these measures may seem at first sight to be harsh; but when it is considered that those calling themselves Union men and good citizens will not only not resist these lawless acts of outrage and these infamous assassinations of persons employed in the public service, but will absolutely refuse to interpose or to give the names of persons in their very midst who are and have been engaged in such atrocious transactions, I think the course I have adopted will appear sufficiently mild for the case. I transmit also copies of orders issued from these headquarters for your information. As soon as I learn that you have reached Saint Louis I will report to you in person.

Respectfully, general, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* See p. 187.

** See “Notice,” p. 189.

[Inclosure.]

ORDERS, No. 1.}

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, July 24, 1861.

I. By virtue of instructions received from Major-General Frémont, U. S. Army, the undersigned assumes the command of all the forces in North Missouri.

...

V. ... The printed notice* transmitted with this order will be circulated as extensively as possible by each commander within the limits hereafter fixed, and each commanding officer will report to the district headquarters as soon as practicable the names and residences of proper persons to be appointed as specified in the printed notice, dividing for that purpose their respective districts into subdivisions not exceeding seven miles in extent. The jurisdiction of the commanding officer at Warrenton will extend as far north as Montgomery City and as far south as the line of Saint Charles County near Millville; of the commanding officer at Mexico from Montgomery City on the south to include Centralia on the north; of the commanding officer at Renick from Centralia to Macon City; of the commanding officer of the forces east and west of Macon City from Hannibal and Quincy to Saint Joseph, with such subdivisions as he may designate. Within these limits the commanding officers will comply strictly with the terms of the printed notice herewith inclosed, and will immediately select proper persons without regard to political opinions (preferring men of property and respectability) to report to the general commanding as fit to be appointed superintendents of the divisions and subdivisions of the railroad specified by the commanders respectively.

{p.193}

VI. All illegal assemblages will be promptly broken up by commanding officers nearest the place where they may be held and all persons taken in arms against the United States will be immediately sent forward to Mexico to be disposed of by the general commanding.

VII. Each commanding officer will send out such patrols and scouting parties as may be necessary to keep him informed of all matters pertaining to his jurisdiction, and will be vigilant and prompt in suppressing all combinations against the authority of the United States or the peace of the country. No arrests will be made for opinion’s sake unless the parties are engaged in open acts of hostility or are stimulating others to such acts by inflammatory words or publications. It is the mission of the forces under my command in North Missouri to restore peace and safety to a region distracted with civil commotion and to bring to punishment the infamous assassins and incendiaries who have been infesting this country.

...

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* See “Notice,” July 21, 1861, p 189.

–––

BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS, Hudson, July 25, 1861.

Lieutenant-Colonel WILSON, Commanding Sixteenth [Illinois] Regiment:

You will on Friday night next repair to post at Muscle Fork and take command of a detachment of fifty men, to be drawn in your judgment from Captain Johnson’s company and from the company east of that point, the commander of which you will notify in time. With this command proceed with such means of transportation by wagons as can be obtained and guides perfectly familiar with the country; you will move by the best route toward New Boston, timing yourself so as to arrive there about 9 a.m. of Saturday. If on information of the guides it will be practicable to conceal yourselves within a mile or two of New Boston you will start early enough to reach the place of concealment before daylight. If not perfectly certain of this do not arrive there before 9. Move upon the town from the south and east; occupy it. If you find as I am informed you will secessionists assembled for drill charge them rapidly, kill and disperse and drive them if possible to the north and west, where they will be intercepted by Washington Home Guards, under command of W. S. Buckley. The instant they are dispersed if found there let detachments search houses and stores and outbuildings for ammunition and arms. If any man resist your search by violence after being notified shoot him. Collect all arms and ammunition in the hands of men not known to be loyal; arrest Doctor Prior, Morris and any other leaders or any man in whose possession more than ordinary quantities of arms and ammunition may be found. You will give to the Washington Home Guards when they join you all such ammunition and arms as they need from the captured stock. This movement must be made without fail as the Washington Home Guards will be on hand. You are charged with making the necessary detail to carry out this order. If more than fifty men can be spared safely from the post you will take not to exceed seventy-five.

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army.

{p.194}

–––

BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS, Quincy, July 27, 1861.

Maj. Gen. JOHN C. FRÉMONT, U. S. Army.

SIR: By orders from Brigadier-General Pope, commanding in North Missouri, I assumed charge of the line of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad. Four regiments occupied this line-Nineteenth Illinois, at Palmyra; Sixteenth Illinois, at Hudson City; Third Iowa, at Chillicothe; Second Iowa, at Saint Joseph. Orders this day issued by General Pope have been obeyed to forward the Nineteenth Illinois and Second Iowa to Saint Louis. They are on their way.

But it becomes my duty to report to you that the present force is wholly inadequate for the duty assigned; that the two regiments removed covered the termini of the road and protected its connections; that the country north of the road is inflamed and excited, and the region immediately southwest of Hannibal, in Ralls County, is infested by strong bands of rebels threatening Hannibal in considerable numbers and with at least two pieces of iron artillery. To oppose this I hold Hannibal with one company of Palmer’s Fourteenth Illinois and three ill-disciplined companies of home guards; one company of the Fourteenth at South Bridge, between Hannibal and Palmyra. There is a vacancy from these points to Salt Creek where the outposts of the Sixteenth Illinois begin. Thence to Hannibal the road is well guarded; from Hannibal to Saint Joseph no troops; at Saint Joseph about 350 raw home guards. I go to-morrow the length of the road. I desire to state expressly and officially that the feeling along the line is hostile to this road. It is owned in Boston by wealthy men and the people believe it will be repaired if injured. They call it an abolition road. There is no such feeling as to the North Missouri-that is called a State road. I will defend it to the best of my ability; but with cavalry and artillery withdrawn from me and stationary scattered guards of infantry, with an entire regiment (the Third Iowa) without cartridge-boxes, belts or scabbards, justice to myself and the men under my command compels me to notify you in advance that my means are wholly insufficient and that if the road is broken up as I think it will be in forty-eight hours I and my command are not responsible. I have extended and obeyed of course promptly all orders on this subject; but desire to say that unless as I presume is the case public necessity requires this movement it exposes our connections and leaves us with both wings cut off in the heart of an unreconciled and hostile country.

Your obedient servant,

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 10.}

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, Mo., July 29, 1861.

Brig. Gen. John Pope is assigned to the command of all the troops in the State of Missouri north of the city of Saint Louis.

By order of Major-General Frémont:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

{p.195}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 3.}

HDQRS. DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, July 31, 1861.

The commanding general in North Missouri being about to assemble in one camp away from the railroad lines all of the forces under his command has determined to commit to the people of North Missouri the peace and quietude of their own section and with these the safety of their property. Certainly the people of the various counties have today the same machinery of government and the same power of self-protection against lawless marauders as they had a year ago, and it only needs the same active agency and the same common interest to bring together for such a purpose all those who have anything at stake. It is demonstrated by sufficient testimony and by the experience of the past two weeks that the disturbances in Northern Missouri have been made by small parties of lawless marauders, which at any other time could have been easily suppressed with no more than the usual exertions of the people against breaches of the peace in times past. Certainly quiet and good order are of all things desirable in civilized communities and should form a common bond of union between citizens of every shade of political opinion. When these desirable results are secured there will no longer be a necessity for the presence of armed forces in North Missouri.

It is therefore the purpose of the general commanding in this region of country before removing the military forces under his command from their present stations to visit with a considerable force every county seat and considerable town in North Missouri and in each to appoint a committee of public safety of persons selected from those of all parties who have social, domestic and pecuniary interests at stake. Each committee shall consist of not more than five persons, and wherever it can consistently be done the proper county officers shall be selected as members. No one thus appointed shall be permitted to decline or shall fail to perform his duties under such penalties as the commanding general shall affix. These committees shall be charged with the duty of maintaining peace and order in their respective counties, and shall have power to call out all citizens of the county to assemble at such times and places and in such numbers as may be necessary to secure these objects. Any one who shall refuse to obey such call will be turned over to the military authorities.

If the people of the counties respectively are not willing or able to enforce the peace among themselves and to prevent the organizing of companies to make war upon the United States the military force will perform the service, but the expenses must be paid by the county in which such service is necessary. To secure their prompt payment a levy of a sufficient amount of money will be at once made and collected by the officer in command. Upon the call of a majority of the committee of public safety in each county troops will be sent to keep the peace, but as such expeditions are for the benefit of the people concerned who have in nearly every case the power to discharge the service themselves the troops thus sent will be quartered upon them and subsisted and transported by the county in the manner above specified for the whole period it may be necessary for them to remain.

If in consequence of disturbance not reported by the committee the general commanding finds it necessary to send a force into any county to restore order they will be in like manner billeted upon the county unless the combination against the peace were too powerful to be resisted or the parties engaged were organized in other counties and brought on the disturbances by actual invasion. It is not believed that {p.196} the first case can arise in any county of North Missouri; and in the second the forces will be marched into the county or counties where the marauding parties were organized or whence they made the invasion and will in like manner be quartered upon them. Where peace and good order are preserved the troops will not be required; where they are disturbed they will be restored at the expense of the county. To preserve the peace is the duty of all good citizens, and as all will suffer alike from the breach of it men of every shade of political opinion can act cordially together in the discharge of a duty as full of interest to one as to another.

By performing this simple service as in times past and which it is certainly as much their interest and their duty to discharge to-day the people of this section of the country will be spared the anxiety, uneasiness and apprehension which necessarily attend the presence of armed forces in their midst and will again enjoy that security of person and property which has hitherto been their privilege.

All persons who have heretofore been led away to take up arms against the United States are notified that by returning and laying down their arms at the nearest military post and by performing their duty hereafter as peaceful and law-abiding citizens they will not be molested by the military forces, nor so far as the general commanding can influence the matter will they be subjected to punishment unless they have committed murder or some other aggravated offense.

By order of Brigadier-General Pope:

SPEED BUTLER, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

ORDERS, No. 3.}

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, August 2, 1861.

In accordance with Special [General] Orders, No. 3, of July 31, 1861, the following movements of troops will immediately be made:

Brigadier-General Hurlbut with such force as he may consider necessary upon New London, Palmyra, Shelbyville, Bloomington, Linneus, Chillicothe, Gallatin, Kingston, Maysville, Plattsburg and Saint Joseph. Col. T. A. Marshall with two companies of cavalry and one piece of artillery upon Paris; Captain McNulta with one company of cavalry upon Bowling Green and Danville, and Captain Peck, Twenty-first Illinois Volunteers, upon Troy and Warrenton; the commanding officer of the Fourteenth Illinois Volunteers with the four companies of his regiment at Renick upon Huntsville and Fayette, first removing regimental baggage and stores to Renick where the regiment will be concentrated at the expiration of this special service.

The commanding officers respectively will carefully examine the instructions contained in Special [General] Orders, No. 3, herewith inclosed, which they will distribute at the various settlements along the march.

They will assemble at each county seat here specified the most respectable citizens of the town and neighborhood and will read and carefully explain to them the provisions and requirements of the special [general] order.

They will then select from the number at least five of the most responsible persons taken from all political parties and appoint them a committee of public safety charged with preserving peace in their respective counties.

{p.197}

When it can be done consistently with the special [general] order the existent county officers or such number of them as may be judicious will be placed upon these committees. The names of the members of the committee thus selected will be announced to the people by the commanding officers both at the court-house and on the return march to this place.

All citizens will be warned that the troops stand ready to enforce promptly and vigorously every provision of Special [General] Orders, No. 3, and will be exerted for their safety and good name and for the peace of their counties, to preserve quiet among themselves.

...

[SPEED BUTLER,] Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, August 2, 1861.

Col. J. D. STEVENSON, Commanding in Jefferson City.

COLONEL: I inclose herewith a number of printed copies of General Orders, No. 3, from these headquarters.

You are instructed to move with such force as you deem necessary to the county seats of the counties adjacent to you and to appoint the committees of public safety specified in the printed order, distributing that order as extensively as possible and notifying the people that its provisions will be strictly and vigorously enforced.

In selecting members of the committees you appoint be careful to take men of substance and respectability, preferring those of secession proclivities. I desire it to be made known that the safety of person and property in all that region of country will depend upon the preservation of peace and order and that the best and only protection to family and property will be the presence of every man at home engaged in his usual pursuits. Upon the secessionists as well as the Union men must devolve the duty of maintaining the peace in all sections of North Missouri under my government, and they must understand that however they may escape responsibility by flight their property will always be at hand and will be dealt with according to the terms of the special [general] order.

Report to me the names, places of residence, &c., of all you appoint on these committees and your whole action in the matter.

Respectfully, sir, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, August 2, 1861.

COMMANDING OFFICER IOWA FORCES, Keokuk, Iowa.

SIR: Inclosed are instructions for your movement with your command upon Memphis, Waterloo, Monticello and Edina. ... In selecting members for the committee of public safety you are directed to appoint be sure to put upon it at least two or better still three of the most worthy and prominent secessionists. It is the service of the {p.198} secessionists I specially require and I desire that you will give them plainly to understand that unless peace is preserved their property will be immediately levied upon and their contribution collected at once in any kind of property at hand.

When once the secessionists are made to understand that upon peace in their midst depends the safety of their families and property we shall soon have quiet again in North Missouri. Take care that your men are orderly and commit no excesses.

Respectfully, sir, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, August .2, 1861.

Colonel WORTHINGTON, Commanding Iowa Troops, Keokuk.

SIR: Immediately upon receipt of this order you will direct Colonel Bussey with his cavalry to march forthwith to Memphis, in Scotland County, and having discharged the duty hereafter specified in this order to effect a junction at Edina with the remainder of the forces under your command. You will please put one of your infantry regiments on march for Edina by the way of Waterloo and with time other regiment under your immediate command you will take boat for Canton and proceed to Edina by way of Monticello. When you have effected a junction there with your other forces report to me your operations and all matters of interest. Buy provisions for your troops whenever you need them and give orders for payment on the chief commissary at these headquarters.

You will disperse all bands of armed secessionists and if any are captured in arms send them direct to this place for trial. I send you a printed notice* to be distributed along the routes pursued by your respective columns and direct the commanding officer to appoint committees specified in the printed order, selecting for that purpose the most wealthy and prominent men in the county preferring mostly the secessionists. The printed orders and accompanying letter will inform you fully of the system I intend to adopt in Northeast Missouri. I wish to give the secessionists such inducements as loss of property and danger to families to aid Union men in keeping the peace. Notify all the population that the forces stand prepared to enforce this printed notice fully and vigorously and commence it with your forces as soon as you think it desirable. Act promptly and vigorously and I think peace will result to all parts of North Missouri.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding North Missouri.

NOTE.-The same instructions given to the commanding officer of the Iowa forces were furnished Col. T. A. Marshall for his movement upon Paris; Captain Peck, Twenty-first Illinois Volunteers, for movement with his company upon Troy and Warrenton; Captain McNulta for movement with one company of cavalry upon Bowling Green and Danville, and to the commanding officer of Fourteenth Regiment Illinois Volunteers for movement with four companies upon Huntsville and Fayette.

* See “Notice” of July 21, p 189.

{p.199}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, August 3, 1861.

J. H. STURGEON, Esq., Saint Louis, Mo.

DEAR SIR: Your letter of the 1st instant is before me.* I will with great satisfaction reply to your inquiries as well from personal regard for yourself as that it gives me the opportunity to explain clearly what few persons in your city seem to comprehend.

When I arrived in North Missouri to assume the command I found the whole country in commotion, bridges and railroad tracks destroyed or in great danger of being so, and the entire population in a state of excitement and apprehension unwarranted by the facts. My first object has been to restore quiet and secure the safety of public and private property. The only persons in arms so far as I could learn were a few reckless and violent men in parties of twenty or thirty who were wandering about committing depredations upon all whose sentiments were displeasing and keeping this whole region in apprehension and uneasiness. I found that those who had been quiet had been no more; had taken no part to prevent the outrages committed by these lawless bands, and had not even been willing to give information by which they could be apprehended or prevented from engaging in hostile and lawless acts against the peace of the country.

So soon as these marauders found that troops were approaching, which they easily did from the very persons who ask for protection, they dispersed, each man going to his home and in many cases that home in the very town occupied by the troops. Parties of these men would leave their houses and families in the immediate vicinity and engage in forays upon Union men and their property in the immediate neighborhood being sure that those even most opposed to their lawless conduct would carefully shield them from exposure. The mass of the people stood quietly looking on at a few men in their midst committing all sorts of atrocious acts and neither attempted to prevent them nor to give any information by which they could have been prevented and punished.

This was the actual state of things in a large part of the eastern counties of Northern Missouri. When troops were sent out against these marauders they found only men quietly working in the field or sitting in their offices who as soon as the backs of the Federal soldiers were turned were again in arms and menacing the peace. To such an extent had this gone that there was no safety of persons or property in North Missouri except to the secessionists and the Union men were too timid or too munch in the minority to offer the least resistance. My first object was to restore peace and safety so that the forces under my command could be removed from the vicinity of the settlements, and to do this with the least bloodshed, the least distress to quiet persons and the least exasperation of feeling among the people.

Two courses were open to me to effect this desirable result: The first was to put in motion in all parts of this region small bodies of troops to hunt out the parties in arms against the peace and follow them to their homes or places of retreat wherever they might be. This course would have led to frequent and bloody encounters, to searching of houses and arrest in many cases of innocent persons, and would only have resulted in spreading the apprehension of distress over districts hitherto quiet. I was and am satisfied that the people of the counties in North Missouri are abundantly able to keep peace among themselves {p.200} and this is all I ask to exact from them. It is certainly their interest that they should do so. To spare effusion of blood, destruction of life or property and harassing and ofttimes undiscriminating outrage upon the people I have determined to present to the people if possible some common inducement to preserve the peace in their own midst. The common bond is their property, always in my power though the owner might be beyond my reach. I believed as I do now that as soon as it was felt that only by preserving peace and quiet among themselves and not molesting public or private property there would result security of person and property and the power to pursue unmolested their several avocations. Union men and secessionists would alike engage in putting a stop to lawless and predatory bands, and that the persons themselves who had joined these armed marauders would soon cease their forays and abandon their organizations when they discovered that they had no sympathizers at home and that every act that they committed hostile to the peace of the country was a blow not only at their own property and safety but also at that of their own friends and relatives. Certainly loss of property is not to be weighed for a moment with loss of life or personal liberty, and as I believe firmly that the policy I have adopted will bring peace and quiet to North Missouri with the least destruction of human life I intend to enforce it promptly and vigorously in all cases.

Security of property and the absence of the military depend simply upon the people of North Missouri keeping the peace among themselves as in times past, and if they fail to do so they will be less wise than most of their race. I have not the slightest disposition to play the tyrant to any man on earth. I only ask the people of North Missouri to keep the peace and respect the rights of others in their own midst and this I mean to exact from them if I have the power. If they will only do this, as they have done in times past and can easily do now they will neither see me nor my command.

I sincerely hope that these views may be satisfactory to you, and remain,

Very truly, yours, &c.,

JNO. POPE.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, August 4, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON.

CAPTAIN: I have the honor to report for the information of the general commanding the department that by a simultaneous movement I shall to-night or to-morrow morning occupy in force the county seats of the nineteen counties lying east of the North Missouri Railroad and its proposed continuation north to the Iowa line. The three Iowa regiments have been instructed to move as follows: The cavalry regiment to Memphis, the-county seat of Scotland County, and thence to Edina, the county seat of Knox, near which it is reported that a camp of 2,500 secessionists has been established; one infantry regiment to march upon Edina direct from Keokuk, the other to come down to Canton and thence to march upon Edina by way of Monticello. These three regiments will effect a junction to-night or to-morrow morning at that point, Brigadier-General Hurlbut is instructed to occupy Palmyra, Shelbyville and Bloomington, the county seats of Marion, Shelby and Macon. He has probably done so to-day. Colonel Marshall with 500 infantry, 100 cavalry and 2 pieces of horse artillery moved from this {p.201} place day before yesterday with the design of occupying Paris, the county seat of Monroe, and thence upon New London and Hannibal; Captain McNulta with 100 cavalry upon Bowling Green, the county seat of Pike County, from Montgomery City, on the line of North Missouri road. Captain Peck, Twenty-first Illinois Volunteers, with 300 infantry from Warrenton on this road marched yesterday and occupies to-day Troy, the county seat of Lincoln. Five companies of infantry under Major Goddard occupy Fulton, the county seat of Callaway County. Lieutenant-Colonel Johnson with 400 men occupies Huntsville, seat of Randolph County, to-day. Macon City, the junction of Hannibal and Saint Joe road, is held by five companies of Sixteenth Illinois Volunteers, and Sturgeon on line of North Missouri road by four companies of the Fourteenth.

If these movements have been made promptly and vigorously by to-morrow morning the forces will occupy all those points, and as no place of retreat for armed parties of secessionists will be left in all that region without time certainty of encountering some portion of the U. S. forces it is expected that they will either be taken or dispersed. The object of these movements was as much to put in operation the policy marked out in Special [General] Orders, No. 3, from these headquarters, copies of which are inclosed, as with an expectation of finding any considerable force in arms against the United States. I inclose also copy of instructions issued to officers in command of these various columns as also copy of a letter addressed to J. H. Sturgeon, Esq.* These various papers will explain fully the policy I am pursuing and the reasons therefor. In addition to the reasons thus assigned I have to say that by pursuing the system of hunting out these guerrilla parties the whole force under my command will be as much demoralized and as little fitted for active service in campaign as the marauding parties themselves. I am compelled to pursue some policy however harsh which will enable me to assemble my forces in a camp of instruction that I may establish that discipline and habit of service essential to any efficiency in the field hereafter. Raw troops such as these grow worse every day by this system of small detachments scattered over the country on police duty, and if it be pursued for two months I shall have a mob and not an army to command.

I have selected a point near Brookfield, on the Hannibal and Saint Joe Railroad, for a camp for all the forces under my command. Water is abundant and good and the ground fine rolling prairie with timber at hand on both sides. I shall move to that point as soon as the quartermaster in Saint Louis can send forward transportation. It is my design in moving to that point to occupy in succession Columbia, Fayette, Glasgow and Keytesville.

I am, captain, respectfully, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding in North Missouri.

* See pp. 196-199, respectively, for these inclosures.

–––

HDQRS. MILITARY DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Mexico, August 5, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT, U. S. Army, Commanding Department of the West, Saint Louis.

GENERAL: I send down Colonel Grant, of the Twenty-first Illinois Volunteers, to inform you more fully than can be done by letter of the {p.202} policy I am pursuing here and its effects upon the people. He can also give full information concerning all matters of interest in this region. He bears with him dispatches to the Adjutant-General of which I beg your careful perusal. Colonel Grant is an old army officer, thoroughly a gentleman, and an officer of intelligence and discretion. I received a dispatch from Chester Harding, jr., assistant adjutant-general, this morning dated Cairo, August 3. It is in cipher and I have not the key. I have directed Colonel Grant to ask it from you and to return at once by special engine. The publication in the Democrat of orders issued from these headquarters for the movement of troops was wholly unauthorized and was made through the indiscretion of the officers to whom they were issued and who will be held accountable. I think you need entertain no apprehension about the peace of North Missouri. You will doubtless hear many rumors more or less substantiated by seemingly good testimony, but from examination of many such I have found that there is little dependence to be placed on them. The arms of this command are old and worthless. About one-third of each company are without arms which can be used at all. The cavalry are wholly without arms of any kind except a few old flint-lock single-barreled pistols altered to percussion. Can you not have us furnished with approved arms?

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 8, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General, Saint Louis.

CAPTAIN: I have the honor to report that I transmitted to General Hurlbut this morning a dispatch directing him to ascertain who did the firing on the passenger train yesterday near Palmyra, to shoot any man he caught who was engaged in it and to move at once with at least 500 men to the district in which this marauding party was organized and occupy it as directed in Special [General] Order, No. 3,* from these headquarters. I have instructed him to billet his command upon the population and to require from them subsistence and transportation until all was quiet again.

I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* Order of July 31, 1861, p. 195.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, August 8, 1861.

General S. A. HURLBUT:

If the train was fired into investigate it immediately. Find what section [the] party which fired came from and immediately occupy it with Illinois or Iowa regiments, quartering the men in houses and demanding subsistence, &c., for them in compliance with Special [General] Orders, No. 3. It is to enforce this order promptly and rigorously that I wish to keep your force concentrated. As soon as you can {p.203} ascertain from what county those who fired came from march instantly with a whole regiment to occupy it. Shoot any who were concerned in the firing. My headquarters will be here. Keep me advised by telegraph every day.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 9, 1861.

COMMANDING OFFICER, Boonville, Mo.

SIR: I transmit herewith Special [General] Orders, No. 3,* from these headquarters, which is to be made applicable to Lexington, Boonville, Kansas City and the towns and counties along the river. You will therefore distribute this order at once among the people of Boonville and the adjacent counties and appoint a committee of public safety in Boonville to consist of five of the most wealthy and prominent men taking at least three secessionists. You will read and carefully explain to them the provisions of the special order and accept no excuses from serving from anyone appointed a member of the committee. Report their names to these headquarters immediately and notify all persons in Boonville of their names and their appointment. Have a number of copies printed of the special order for distribution and impress distinctly upon the people that any disturbance of the peace or any assembling of armed forces hostile to the Government will be promptly followed by the occupation of the houses of the people by strong bodies of U. S. troops, who will be fed and transported by them for the whole period necessary to restore peace and to insure its being kept. I wish and intend not only to enlist the interests of the secessionists to preserve the peace in their own midst but I am resolved that for every breach of it they shall suffer a pretty severe penalty. I am satisfied that peace can be kept if the people will interest themselves in keeping it, and I have therefore furnished them with a very strong inducement to do so. Report to me at once when you have completed these arrangements furnishing all needed information.

Respectfully, sir, your obedient servant,

[JNO. POPE,] Brigadier-General, Commanding in North Missouri.

* Order of July 31, 1861, p. 195.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., August 9, 1861.

General S. A. HURLBUT:

Don’t fail to act promptly and vigorously according to orders. Go to the county where the marauders fired on the train. Force the people under penalty to tell where those men came from. If you cannot find out occupy with your forces the district and county seat and county in which the firing was done. Don’t fail in severity or in strict compliance with orders or upon yourself will rest a serious responsibility.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

{p.204}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, August 10, 1861.

Maj. Gen. J. C. FRÉMONT, Saint Louis.

DEAR SIR: At the present time the counties of Monroe, Ralls, Marion and Shelby are infested by bands of armed men encamped in different places and frequently changing their place of encampment. It is believed that at the present time a large majority of the people of Monroe and Ralls Counties favor secession. In Marion and Shelby the majority is not so large. I think the number in camp in these counties must be between 1,000 and 2,000, and such is the communication kept up between them that if they desired to concentrate a force at any point I have no doubt they could bring out over 2,000 at short notice including those who are usually at home at their work. In addition to the rifles and shotguns of the country they have some muskets with bayonets; these are said to be about 400 in number. They also have two cannon, 6 and 9 pounders, made at Hannibal. It is said they have others taken from the Liberty Arsenal. I think they have others.

These men are exceedingly bitter in their feelings of hostility and have been led on until many of them are fit for any deed. Usually they are ignorant; they are fed on falsehood and are encouraged in their course in the strong belief that Jackson is soon to reinstate himself as governor of the State. To this the defeat at Manassas and the invasion of the State from the South-aided by false statements, such as that Bird’s Point has been taken and that Lyon and Sigel have been cut up-gives great encouragement.

It must be confessed that there have been many aggravating causes to produce this state of things. You already know the many depredations committed by the soldiery. Perhaps this has not been the worst. Frightful stories as to what the soldiers would do if they came into the State preceded them on their approach to a place. Many were ready to run from fright. It occurred to my knowledge in a good many cases where men thus ran and did not obey the order to halt, which very likely they did not understand if they heard; they were fired upon-not single shots but volleys-in the presence but without the command of officers. Whether any were killed in this way I do not know, it has been reported to me that soldiers have repeatedly fired from trains at quiet, peaceable citizens. I believe this though I have not seen it. Very many have been arrested without any cause except that they were reported secessionists; and not only this but indignities have been put upon them such as requiring them to “mark time,” dig ditches and sink-holes for filth. The present week Mr. McAfee, speaker of the last house of representatives, was arrested and required by General Hurlbut to dig trenches in the hot sun as I was told all day. Hurlbut himself told me he set him at it. McAfee is no doubt a very bad and dangerous man; still it was admitted that it was very doubtful if any charge could be maintained against him. If he is now let go for want of cause to hold him I fear he will be able to do us much more hurt than heretofore.

Now, sir, when these facts which are bad enough are greatly exaggerated by crafty men they have led many especially young men into a bad cause from really noble and generous impulses. When once they are in and have committed the overt act it is hard to get them out. These things have tended greatly to weaken the Union cause and in the State where I am acquainted there are far less Union men than two months since.

{p.205}

Many timid Union men who have seen secessionists grow more numerous, bold and threatening have thought they would succeed. Many such who can have left the State or are intending to leave it, while perhaps a larger number think it is of no use to struggle against it and bow to the storm. I have dwelt at length on the condition of things and the causes that you may know better how to adapt the remedy.

Complaint is made by officers that they cannot get information. It is well known that the wrath of an unscrupulous foe falls on the head of an informer, and there never has been and is not to-day any adequate protection for such men. Few are bold enough to take the position.

You no doubt desire to retain all your present friends if possible and strengthen their hands while you weaken the enemy, and give them the least possible just occasion to complain. I think if an arrangement could be made to pay for the destruction and loss wantonly and unlawfully done by the soldiery it would go far to place the Government right before the public mind. The Government is now industriously made responsible for these abuses. Then if persons should be exempt from arrest for their opinions for the same reason should not their property be protected also? Yet it is the published purpose of General Pope to hold communities responsible for acts of violence committed among them. This might do in a foreign country but I do not think it can be done here without alienating friends and making the feeling still more bitter on the part of the enemies. The present plan of appointing leading secessionists to look after and protect the railroads works in this way: They are authorized to call out who and as many as they please at all times. They use this to order out the Union men to their great annoyance, intending no doubt if they fail fully to respond to report them and as far as possible have them held responsible for any damage. It is already creating great dissatisfaction. The principle of holding peaceable, quiet men responsible in a military contribution for damages done by lawless and violent men is one which can never meet with favor in the popular mind. It is said these roving bands cannot be reached but well-informed men in the country think differently. A suitable mounted force would be required and it can be done. At least their cannon can be taken and they are a “tower of strength” to them in their moral effect on the community.

You may consider much that I have written impertinent. I can only say I have not so intended it. I have felt that in the multitude of your cares there were many facts of which you were not aware. The work to be done in Missouri I consider far more delicate and difficult to do well than if it were a State in open hostility to the Government. I shall call attention to a few points on our road and I have done: At Hannibal are all our repair shops and a large part of our engines and rolling-stock. If these were destroyed it would greatly cripple the road. The destruction of the South River bridge, between Hannibal and Palmyra, would cut us off from there and produce nearly the same effect. This bridge is one-quarter of a mile long and sixty feet high. The bridges at Chariton and Grand River are important and would seriously embarrass the operations of the road if they were destroyed. No other bridge would delay trains more than a few days if destroyed. I think these bridges and Hannibal should be guarded. There are especial reasons for an attack on Hannibal. I am confident the rebels can bring a force of 2,000 men if they choose. There are only between 300 and 400 home guards to protect it. If attacked we are determined {p.206} to whip the enemy, but it is not prudent as it is the key to the whole route and it must be the only reliable route for communication and transportation to all the country west from now until next spring. Begging pardon for this trespass on your time, I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. T. K. HAYWARD.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 10, 1861.

Brigadier-General HURLBUT:

The commanding general has learned with surprise from the public journals of the arrest and confinement at your headquarters of Speaker McAfee, of the late house of representatives of Missouri. He directs that you report immediately all circumstances connected with this case and your reasons for not having reported the fact to him.

Respectfully, sir, your obedient servant,

[SPEED BUTLER,] Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SUPERINTENDENT’S OFFICE, HANNIBAL AND SAINT JOSEPH RAILROAD COMPANY, Hannibal, Mo., August 12, 1861.

General J. C. FRÉMONT, Saint Louis.

DEAR SIR: On Saturday General Hurlbut removed McAfee (late speaker of the house of representatives) from Macon to Palmyra. He gave orders to have him tied to the top of the cab on the engine but was dissuaded from it by our men. Such outrages will make more enemies than thousands of men can quell.

Respectfully,

J. T. K. HAYWARD.

–––

PALMYRA, August 12, 1861.

Col. R. F. SMITH, Sixteenth Regiment Illinois.

SIR: Your command has been ordered here to punish the people of Marion County for their connivance in the various outrages committed within their limits. You have been instructed to enforce contributions if not made by 9 a.m. to-day. This has been neglected. I now expressly and in plain terms order you if provisions are not delivered to your command by 5 p.m. to detach sufficient force from each company and take such supplies or their equivalent by force, giving to the persons from whom your men may take receipts against the county of Marion. If any further difficulty occurs in rendering provisions and supplies for your command you will daily repeat this compulsory levy. The object is to compel this people to ferret out, seize and deliver to this command the men who have fired on the trains, who have committed outrages on the bridge-tenders and other peaceable citizens. If supplies are regularly furnished you will remain encamped where you are; if not occupy the houses of the most prominent citizens with {p.207} your force and live at free quarters. You will be held strictly responsible for the literal and exact fulfillment of this order. Any failure will subject you to arrest.

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 13, 1861.

Brigadier-General HURLBUT, Hudson, Mo.

SIR: Please forward to these headquarters the names of all persons appointed members of safety committees* which you have in your possession.

By order of General Pope:

[SPEED BUTLER,] Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

* No reports found giving the names of these committees for any of the localities designated in the original instructions.

–––

BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS, Hudson City, August 13, 1861.

General JOHN POPE, U. S. Army, Commanding in North Missouri.

GENERAL: I have this day received your communication of 10th instant in relation to John McAfee. In reply I have the honor to report that John McAfee is held by me for the following reasons: He was arrested not by my direct order but by a party dispatched from this camp to break up a band said to be then encamped two miles east of Shelbyville. In this the party failed, the camp having been removed a few hours before their arrival. They returned through Shelbyville and there captured the prisoner McAfee. The party was guided and accompanied-by W. R. Strachan, U. S. deputy marshal. Strachan desired McAfee detained until he could take him to Saint Louis. He has been so detained and now remains in custody at Palmyra waiting the call of the deputy marshal. I am personally satisfied that McAfee is a dangerous and subtle enemy; that he commits no act himself but encourages and advises others. I inclose herewith a copy of the letter* to me from J. F. Benjamin, of Shelbyville, admitted by everyone to be a cautious and truthful man. I have offered Mr. McAfee his liberty if he would give his pledge not to resist by force the “Gamble Government.” He refused so to do in presence of Mr. Dryden and others of Palmyra. If a man with his antecedents, delivered to a military officer by the U. S. marshal charged with urging the seizure of the arsenal and with furnishing aid to rebels at present in arms and refusing to pledge himself not to resist the government established by the convention by force deserves any special consideration from the fact of having been speaker of the house of representatives which forced the State into present difficulties by outrageous legislation I have not so considered it. I hold that his position requires more of him than was required of those of less information and have so treated him. I was not aware that it was required of me to report to the general commanding every arrest made or should have done so. If U. S. commissioners {p.208} had yet been qualified in this region I should have delivered him to that authority. He is now held by the U. S. marshal at Palmyra or subject to such order as I may receive from the general commanding.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army.

* Not found.

–––

SPECIAL ORDER.]

PALMYRA, August 13, 1861.

The general commanding the line of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad hereby gives notice to all citizens of Missouri who have actually taken up arms under orders from the late Governor Jackson, or who have under like orders in any way participated in the late movements, that in conformity with the proclamation of Governor Gamble and the orders of the Secretary of War all who voluntarily lay down their arms if they have been in actual service or come in and take the oath of allegiance to the government created by the late convention shall not be arrested by military authority or in any other way treated differently from other peaceable citizens. Those who have resided in Marion County can take the oath of allegiance subscribed by them before Mr. Dryden, of Palmyra, or such person as he may appoint. All such persons will be furnished with a certificate from the commissioner which shall be held as a safeguard, unless they are found afterward guilty of criminal acts. All officers and soldiers under my command who disobey these orders or violate such safeguards will be promptly and severely punished to the extent of military law. No persons except those who have been actually engaged in firing upon the trains will be arrested in any case except upon the order of Colonel Smith, commanding Sixteenth Illinois, in charge of Marion County.

S. A. HURLBUT, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army.

–––

HEADQUARTERS BRIGADE U. S. RESERVE CORPS, Saint Louis, August 13, 1861.

Captain TRACY, Commander of the Post, Saint Louis Arsenal.

SIR: I herewith send Dr. H. Caldwell, a prisoner taken in Lewis County, Mo., near La Grange. The prisoner was one of the most active enemies of the Government in Northeast Missouri. He commanded the enemy’s artillery at the battle near Athens on the - July. He has with his company arrested a number of Union men and particularly Lieut. Joseph R. Rickey, of the Eleventh Missouri Regiment, whom I believe they now hold. He has been an active armed enemy from the beginning. He marched at the head of the rebel forces on Edimia, driving the Union men away and pillaging and destroying their property. He with his company visited Palmyra for the purpose of attacking the U. S. forces there but did not do so. He is one of the leaders of the enemy in all our troubles in that section of the State.

Very respectfully,

JOHN MCNEIL, Col. Third Regiment, U. S. Reserve Corps, Comdg. at Saint Louis.

The prisoner was arrested by Capt. Charlton H. Howe and delivered to me this day by him.

{p.209}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 14, 1861.

Brigadier-General HURLBUT.

SIR: The arrest of Speaker McAfee has been approved by the general commanding and unless he not only pledges himself to keep the peace but will use all his influence in so doing in his immediate vicinity of country you will forward him to this place.

By order of General Pope:

[SPEED BUTLER,] Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 14, 1861.

Brigadier-General HURLBUT.

SIR: In consequence of solemn pledges from a deputation of respectable citizens of Palmyra that peace will hereafter be kept in Marion County you are authorized to suspend the enforced contribution of supplies, &c, levied upon that town and county. You will, however, keep the force now there at some point in the neighborhood carefully avoiding any outrages or excesses. Keep the troops in camp and punish any violation of the regulations in that respect. Lieutenant-Colonel Williams has left without your authority. Write him a severe letter on the subject or put charges against him. I wish the order published to your command forbidding any officer or soldier from leaving this district without leave of absence from these headquarters. No passes will hereafter be given on any railroad or steam-boat except to persons traveling on important public business.

By order of General Pope:

[SPEED BUTLER,] Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 15, 1861.

Brig. Gen. S. A. HURLBUT.

SIR: I am instructed by the general commanding to acknowledge the receipt of your letter* of the 14th instant inclosing notice and to inform you that orders covering the entire ground were sent to you by yesterday’s mail. If you think it necessary to adopt the same course in Shelby that has been pursued in Palmyra and Marion County you will do so and you will exercise your own discretion as to the length of time the troops will be kept there. The general commanding wishes the requirements of Special [General] Orders, No. 3, enforced in all cases.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[C. A. MORGAN,] Aide-de-Camp.

* Not found.

{p.210}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, August 15, 1861.

General S. A. HURLBUT:

Relieve Marion County and Palmyra from further punishment. Release McAfee. I have explained to you by mail.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, August 15, 1861.

General S. A. HURLBUT:

Do as you please about the camp. Keep at Brookfield if you think best. Report your decision. Release McAfee for reasons which will be given by letter.*

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General.

* No letter found giving reasons for release of McAfee.

–––

PROCLAMATION.

HEADQUARTERS, Saint Genevieve, Mo., August 15, 1861.

To THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF SAINT GENEVIEVE:

On my arrival at this place I found such a disposition on the part of parties who sympathize with the rebel forces as to seriously alarm the Union men for the safety of their lives and property. I deem it my duty to warn all persons who may in any way be connected with such forces that they will be held individually responsible both in their persons and property for any outrage which may be committed on Union men here. When reliably informed of such I will not hesitate to return at once to this city and retaliate in the most summary manner. It will be no excuse that they did not assist the rebels. They must prevent any outrages on Union men or take the consequences.

JOHN MCDONALD Major, Commanding Forces at this Post.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 17, 1861.

Capt. JOHN C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

CAPTAIN: In compliance with directions from the general commanding the department I have the honor to submit the following brief remarks concerning the condition of the district under may command:

In consequence of the firing on the trains of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph road General Hurlbut with 600 men and two pieces of artillery has been occupying Marion County for the past ten days and enforcing the provisions of General Orders, No. 3,* from these headquarters, which requires the inhabitants to furnish quarters, subsistence and transportation in case of difficulties of the kind. The effect has been complete, and in compliance with solemn pledges on the part of {p.211} the citizens presented by a delegation sent to me they were yesterday relieved from the penalty. The force under Martin Green has been driven into the northern part of Adair County. Colonels Moore and Bussey from the east and 550 men and two pieces of artillery from the south are moving upon him and will probably unite to-day in the immediate vicinity of his camp. No doubt his forces will disperse as has been usual. No surprises are possible in a country where all the inhabitants are willing to warn if not to assist such parties. With these exceptions all is quiet in North Missouri as reported to me by the committees of public safety appointed in conformity to General Orders, No. 3. That order seems to have united all responsible persons who have anything to lose in efforts to preserve the peace and they have organized for that purpose. If any skirmishing is done it will be done by the people themselves who are abundantly able to protect themselves and who have a motive to do so which they had not before. Of course they wish troops sent to do this service as it will save them the necessity of personal exertion, but I think it best that they should do the work themselves where it can be done.

Both railroads are undisturbed since the penalty inflicted in Marion County. Of course there is much excitement and uneasiness among the people since the affair at Springfield but I think from the best information I can get that it will result in no disturbance of moment.

...

I am, captain, respectfully, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* Order of July 31, 1861, p. 195.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 17, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

CAPTAIN: I have this moment received telegraphic dispatch from General Hurlbut stating that the train carrying the force which has been quartered upon the county of Marion to Hudson City was fired upon as it left Palmyra and again at Hunnewell, the western edge-of the same county. One man of the Sixteenth Illinois Volunteers was killed and another wounded. The train was halted and the rebels dispersed with loss of five of their number killed. This county of Marion has been the principal seat of the disturbances in North Missouri, and it is my purpose immediately to inflict such punishment as will be remembered.

I am, captain, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 17, 1861.

General HURLBUT.

GENERAL: Your telegraphic dispatch* of this date in relation to the firing upon the train which brought the Sixteenth Illinois Regiment {p.212} from Palmyra has been received. It is clear that strong measures must be taken with Palmyra, Marion County and possibly with Shelby. If the facts set forth in your dispatch be not modified in some way by your official letter you will please notify the county authorities of Marion and the town authorities of Palmyra that the persons who fired on the train from that town and who searched the telegraph office must be given up to the military authorities. Give them six days to do it with the understanding that if not done at the expiration of that time a levy of $10,000 on the county and $5,000 on the town will be made and collected. Of course in this levy you will spare the undoubted Union men. You can collect this amount in money, provisions or forage, or means of transportation, selecting such articles as will be most useful to the forces under your command.

Under present circumstances I think you had best make your headquarters at Palmyra and concentrate all your forces and supplies at that point. Colonel Morgan has authority from General Fremont to raise a force of 500 men in Linn County and has made requisitions for various supplies. He as well as all the forces in that region will come under your command and you can dispose of them as in your judgment will best serve the public interest. Morgan can probably take care of the line of road west of Macon City as there seems to be little trouble in that quarter. You had best get together as many home guards or other forces from the country as are needed to put down these troubles in your midst. So far as I can ascertain most of our troubles along the road come from Marion County. In the northeast Colonel Bussey was to enter Missouri some days since with 1,000 cavalry and march slowly through the counties north of you approaching Hudson so as to open communication with you and co-operate with you in any way you may desire. Of course all such forces will come under your command whilst in your section of country.

I do not wish you to confine your special attention to any particular line but exercise supervision over all that region, acting promptly according to your judgment and the orders furnished you at various times. Report your operations often and fully that I may be exactly advised of all matters of interest. If the offenders are not produced notify the county and town authorities of precisely the quantity of forage, provisions, &c., each must furnish to cover the amounts of money specified and inform them distinctly that if it be not furnished on the day you specify at Palmyra you will send out forces and seize where you can find it at least double the quantity of everything. Give them a reasonable time in which to furnish these articles and if they be not furnished by the expiration of that time proceed promptly to execute the levy. If they can inform you specifically and properly attested to before a magistrate where the marauders came from send to that place and county and have the levy made there. Some severe example is needed or we shall be harassed constantly by these robbers and assassins. Have the men who did the firing or searching tried by a military commission which you will order and at once execute the sentence of the commission upon them. I will endeavor to send you the wagons as you request.

I am, general, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* Not found.

{p.213}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 17, 1861.

Colonel WORTHINGTON, Jefferson City.

COLONEL: Proceed with as little delay as practicable to Lexington appointing committees at points specified. Then return at once with your regiment and the artillery from Lexington to Jefferson City and occupy that place. Answer.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier. General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 18, 1861.

Brigadier-General HURLBUT.

GENERAL: The general commanding directs me to inform you that he has received a letter* from Mr. Hayward, of Hannibal, stating that the firing into the train occurred before the citizens had time to organize for the prevention of such outrages but that a meeting of the citizens had since been held and men sent out to see what could be done and asking that no steps should be taken until the result of this action of the people was ascertained. The general commanding directs me to say that if you think the citizens of Hannibal and Palmyra have taken hold of this matter in earnest and are likely to bring the offenders to justice you will give them a reasonable time to do so, but if you think they are not moving actively or if after a reasonable delay they fail to deliver up the assassins, you will proceed to collect the levy.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[C. A. MORGAN,] Aide-de-Camp.

* Not found.

–––

SPECIAL ORDER.]

BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS, Hudson, Mo., August 19, 1861.

To THE AUTHORITIES OF THE CITY OF PALMYRA AND OF MARION COUNTY:

You are hereby notified and required to deliver up to the military authorities of this brigade within six days from the date of these presents the marauders who fired upon the train bound west on Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad on the evening of the 16th instant and broke into telegraph office at Palmyra. If the guilty persons are not delivered up as required and within the time herein specified the whole brigade will be moved into your county and contributions levied to the amount of $10,000 on Marion County and $5,000 on the city of Palmyra.

By order of Brig. Gen. S. A. Hurlbut, under instructions received from Brig. Gen. John Pope, commanding North Missouri:

S. M. PRESTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 20, 1861.

Colonel BUSSEY.

COLONEL: The general commanding directs you to examine all the prisoners held by Colonel Moore and to send under a proper guard all {p.214} who were taken in arms against the Government or who have in any way encouraged or pretended to encourage or promote any disturbance or breach of the peace to this city and to send an officer to report their arrival to Brigadier-General Pope at his headquarters on the corner of Fourth street and Washington avenue. You will also send a clear and concise statement of the offense of each individual. You will set at liberty all against whom no charges are established.

I am, colonel, respectfully, your obedient servant,

[C. A. MORGAN,] Aide-de-Camp.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 20, 1861.

Col. CYRUS BUSSEY, Keokuk, Iowa.

COLONEL: I am directed by the general commanding to request you to examine all the prisoners taken by Colonel Moore, and to send under proper guard to the arsenal all who were taken in arms against the Government or who have been in any way concerned in the breaches of the peace or outrages, with a specification of the offense of each prisoner. You will set at liberty all against whom there is no authenticated charge.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[C. A. MORGAN,] Aide-de-Camp.

–––

BARNUM’S HOTEL, SAINT LOUIS, August 24, 1861.

Maj. Gen. JOHN C. FRÉMONT, Saint Louis.

SIR: The undersigned beg leave to call your attention to the state of things touching the public peace in Northern Missouri and to invoke the intervention of your authority immediately to correct the evils upon us and to avert the still greater ills with which we are threatened. The brigadier-general for the suppression of the rebellion and for the keeping of the peace in that region has adopted the policy of requiring each county to keep the peace within its own borders; in case of disorders to render up to the military authorities at brigade headquarters the disturbers of the peace or in default thereof to submit to the levy of such contributions on the inhabitants (loyal and disloyal alike) as will meet the expenses of a military force sufficient to restore order. Herewith find an order* of Brigadier-General Hurlbut which marks the policy. To this policy we submit most respectfully the following objections: First, it is without warrant of law. Second, it proposes to punish the innocent with the guilty-Union men with disunionists. Third, it is irritating to the people and deeply injurious to the Union cause. It has already driven thousands from our ranks who were formerly in co-operation with us. Fourth, it proposes to impose penalties prescribed by no law, civil, criminal, or military. Fifth, it assumes as its basis what is false in fact that the civil authorities of the country are capable of-suppressing this monstrous rebellion-an assumption in the face of every step in this war from the President’s first proclamation to the arming of the last regiment mustered into service.

{p.215}

You will perceive that this is the last day limited by General Hurlbut’s order in which the authorities of Marion are to deliver up certain marauders. The threatened levy may commence to-morrow. When it does commence it is our deliberate opinion it will instantly involve at least four-fifths of the people of as many as five or six of the counties in the northeast in open rebellion against the Government and drive out what of Unionism remains. We therefore more earnestly ask your excellency’s instant interposition for the prevention of consequences so direful.

We are with great respect, your obedient servants,

JOHN D. S. DRYDEN. [And 11 Others.]

* See p. 213.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 25, 1861.

Maj. Gen. JOHN C. FRÉMONT, Comdg. Department of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: In view of my conversation with you this morning I have the honor to report as follows:

The policy of making the people along the lines of railroad in North Missouri responsible for any damage done to the roads has perfectly secured them from destruction since it was established. The system of holding property of counties responsible for breaches of peace enlists by the only method possible the active agency of the secessionists in keeping down riots and disturbances. When so large a portion of the population sympathizes with the authors of the atrocious acts of guerrilla warfare which have hitherto disgraced North Missouri it is impossible to apprehend the perpetrators of such outrages. Since the population has been notified that their property would be made to pay the expense of suppressing such disturbances thousands of persons have taken an active part in preventing them who never did so before. Marion County from which came the protests against this policy has been the worst county in the State. At the request of a deputation from that county it was relieved from the first levy made for firing into a train on the Hannibal and Saint Joseph road but the troops which had been quartered at Palmyra had not proceeded three miles from the place before the train carrying them was fired into from the roadside and one man killed and several wounded. They are now under contribution for this second and aggravated charge.

I have received intelligence from persons of character in most of the counties of North Missouri stating that this policy alone and the fear of the penalty to property prescribed in it prevents the secessionists from driving out Union men and destroying their property. The secession papers in North Missouri are now entreating the population, to preserve the peace because the leading State-rights men (secessionists) are made to serve on committees of safety against their will and their property is made responsible for any violence or breach of peace committed by their friends. Whenever it is discovered that the penalty set forth will not be executed I firmly believe that every county in North Missouri will be in a state of tumult and will require for the restoration of peace five times the force now needed. It is possible that some lukewarm Union men may turn secessionists under the operation of this policy but it is my sure conviction that if it be not enforced thousands of good Union men will be driven from their homes {p.216} and their property despoiled. By enforcing it in Marion County, the only place it has been necessary to do so, I feel sure there will result quiet in that section of country. Where outrages are so expensive they will not be repeated. The system of pursuing the perpetrators of these outrages can lead to no good results while so large a body of people sympathize with them. Its only effect is to break down and demoralize our forces, to carry distress and apprehension to districts hitherto quiet and to render our forces less and less fit for service.

I do not doubt from the results up to this time that the policy of holding property responsible is the true policy, and I firmly believe that if the penalty now hanging over Marion County be rigidly enforced there will be no occasion for anything of the kind there or elsewhere a second time. I therefore respectfully but earnestly request you to suffer this penalty to be exacted, lest a much worse thing befall that people hereafter. It is of course entirely in the power of the people of the various counties in North Missouri to keep the peace among themselves. If they will not do so it surely is not harsh to require that the expense of having it done should be paid by the county. No one will say that if this policy be abandoned there will be anything like quiet in North Missouri. It is the object of the protestants against it to have large forces of home guards paid and subsisted by the United States raised in their midst, so that much money will be distributed among them and the United States shall pay a large local police force of their own people. If they have to pay the expense themselves they will take care that nothing occurs that will render such a force necessary. It is to be borne in mind that the disturbances in North Missouri are purely local and personal and have no view to the result of the great operations of Government. The people in that region are merely fighting with each other in many cases to satisfy feelings of personal hostility of long standing. It is a war which can only be ended by making all engaged in it suffer for every act of hostility committed. As I am satisfied from personal examination and experience that this policy will keep North Missouri quiet with the smallest force and that a departure from it now will only result in an uprising in every county against the Union men which will require large forces to be withdrawn from here to put it down, I most urgently recommend that no favorable reply be made to those who have addressed you on this subject. On the one side there is the risk of alienating a few men hitherto half-way for the Union; on the other the risk of having a considerable portion of the people in every county of North Missouri in arms against the peace. One failure to enforce rigidly this penalty will destroy all belief that it will ever be enforced at all.

Respectfully, general, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS U. S. FORCES, Jefferson City, Mo., August 25, 1861.

Capt. SPEED BUTLER, Saint Louis, Mo.:

...

The party sent out by me to the neighborhood of where the cars were fired into on Tuesday has returned. The report has not yet been received but may be in time to accompany this. A few persons have {p.217} been arrested who are suspected of having been engaged in the firing. I have no reliable information as to the movements of McCulloch’s forces but there is a current rumor here that he is moving toward this point. From a spy who came in yesterday I learn that companies are being organized in all the counties west of here. Some of these bands are acquiring considerable proportions. Many troops have crossed the Missouri River from the north within the last two weeks and are joining the forces on this side. If I had sufficient force all that could be stopped.

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 26, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT.

GENERAL: In order that the system of preserving the peace in North Missouri and protecting the railroads from destruction together with the reasons that suggested its adoption may be thoroughly placed before you I inclose the printed orders issued* and I ask your careful perusal of them in justice to myself. I have also to request that if it be decided to abandon this policy and release Marion County from a penalty justly incurred it be done through orders from these headquarters in order that my authority in North Missouri be not so impaired that I can no longer have that influence here which alone enables me to be of service.

Respectfully, general, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

* See ante.

–––

HEADQUARTERS U. S. FORCES, Jefferson City, Mo., August 26, 1861.

Col. WILLIAM H. WORTHINGTON, Fifth Iowa Volunteers:

See E. B. McPherson, a true Union man, who will show you a copy of the Boonville Patriot. Bring all the printing material, type, &c., with you. Arrest J. L. Stevens and bring him with you and some copies of the paper he edits. Bailey is a particularly obnoxious person and should be arrested. B. S. Wilson & Co. have been furnishing the rebels with groceries. You may therefore pay him a visit and if you require it draw two or three days’ supplies for your command, keeping an account of the amount taken, its value, &c. Give secessionists to understand what to expect if it becomes necessary to visit them again. Take all canteens you may find from a tin-shop which is reported to have been working for the rebels. It is reported that the proprietor of the ferry-boat has observed his part of the engagement entered into as far as practicable but there is no doubt that he is deceived daily as to the character of the parties he is crossing, and now so many will want to cross that his boat will be taken possession of if not given freely.

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General.

{p.218}

–––

BOSTON, August 27, 1861.

Hon. SIMON CAMERON, Secretary of War, Washington.

SIR: The State of Missouri is so important to the Union that I suppose you will be glad of any information regarding it which comes from a reliable source. I hand you a few extracts from the late letters of Mr. Hayward, general agent of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad. Through the agencies of this line across the State he has great facility for obtaining information and judging of the progress of our cause in the northern portion of the State. His views with regard to the probable effect of measures which have been heretofore taken toward suppressing the rebellion in that vicinity have shown so clear a judgment as to give with us here much weight to his opinions.

...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. W. BROOKS.

[Inclosure No. 1.]

-Extract from letter of J. T. K. Hayward to J. W. Brooks, dated “Steamer Hannibal City, August 13, 1861.”-

I go down to-day with a committee from Palmyra to see what can be done to put a stop to the outrages perpetrated on the community by Government troops partly under orders of officers and partly without orders. I will state the case in part: Last week our trains were fired into several times about six miles west of Palmyra, in Marion County. On Thursday night a party of rebels came into Palmyra, disarmed a few Union men and did some trifling damage. I think there is good reason to believe that the cars were fired into by rangers from another county and without any knowledge of the people near them and that the course is disapproved and reprehended by nearly all. The citizens I think are generally opposed to violence and some of the leading secessionists interfered to prevent trouble and bloodshed when the rebel band visited Palmyra. Now to carry out General Pope’s programme some 600 men are sent to Palmyra and the county court notified to provide them with rations and pay all expenses. In their failure the city council is notified to do it at county expense, and in their failure notice is given that they shall take it where they can most conveniently find it and that these men will be quartered there until they (the people) arrest and deliver over to military authority the men who have been guilty of these offenses. Yesterday as the rations were not forthcoming they sent out a company of troops and visited the stores and took enough for two days’ rations, giving orders on the county. In addition contrary to all general orders many citizens were arrested without cause and generally soon discharged. Houses also have been opened and searched and for no good reason. Then as a sample of what is done by some officers last week a man named McAfee (speaker of the last house of representatives) was arrested. General Hurlbut ordered him to be set to digging trenches and pits for necessaries at which he was kept all one day when the mercury ranged about 100 degrees in the shade. A few days after he was taken from Macon to Palmyra and the general ordered him to be tied on the top of the cab on the engine. It was prevented by our men, who, when persuasion failed, the engineer swore he would not run the engine if it was done (and I upheld him in it), and as he was being marched to the engine to mount it the signal was given and the train started giving them barely time to get on the {p.219} cars. When there is added to this the irregularities of the soldiery-such as taking poultry, pigs, milk, butter, preserves, potatoes, horses and in fact everything they want; entering and searching houses and stealing in many cases; committing rapes on the negroes and such like things-the effect has been to make a great many Union men inveterate enemies and if these things continue much longer our cause is ruined. ... I can fully substantiate all I have written.

[Inclosure No. 2.]

-Extract from letter of J. T. K. Hayward to J. W. Brooks, dated “Steamer Jennie Deans, August 14, 1861.”-

I am on my way from Saint Louis home. I have waited on General Pope with a committee from our county and have succeeded in obtaining promises from him which are tolerably satisfactory. I hope he will carry them out.

The news of recent movements in the State is exciting and I fear its effect on our community. It is of great importance that the Government should be successful here and elsewhere now. The death of General Lyon casts a gloom over us all.

...

There seems to be at present in our part of the State a disposition on the part of good citizens of secession sympathies to cease hostilities and urge those who will fight to enlist and join the regular forces. The partial success of the rebels and the fact that in greatly superior force they are constantly advancing into the State is what I most fear. On the other hand it is very strange with all our boasted superiority in men and resources that the rebels manage at nearly every point to meet our troops with greatly superior numbers. There are screws loose somewhere. I am tired of receiving blows. I want to see the war offensive on our part. This course of events will soon ruin our cause before the world.

[Inclosure No. 3.]

Extract from letter of J. T. K. Hayward to J. W. Brooks, dated “Hannibal, August 17, 1861.”

Most of this week has been spent in efforts for peace and conciliation. Things were getting to such a pass here that no one felt safe and all could see that the matter as it was going on would soon be much worse and men on either side would be shot down at sight while property would be entirely insecure. I think it is a consciousness of this that has made our most respectable and leading secessionists manifest a desire of late to have a stop put to this irregular warfare. At least I have taken advantage of this disposition and worked with them-I trust to some purpose; it remains to be seen how much. Our train was fired into last night and one man killed and three wounded. It was a train mostly of soldiers. A ball passed close to the head of the conductor, aimed as is believed at him expressly. Two of our best runners have left in consequence of their trains being fired on. We intend however to run the road if Farley and myself have to go on the engines and run them. But we must have a change in our military rule here or we are helplessly gone. It is a load the Union men cannot bear.

Yours, truly,

J. T. K. HAYWARD.

{p.220}

[Inclosure No. 4.]

HANNIBAL, August 19, 1861.

J. W. BROOKS, Esq., Boston.

DEAR SIR: Our train was fired into yesterday. There were troops on board. No one hurt. If we cannot have a change in the administration of military affairs here in North Missouri our cause will be ruined. There are a good many rebel camps known to be within three to ten miles of the road; Union men constantly driven out; trains fired into, &c., and yet no effort made to attack them.

Yours, truly,

J. T. K. HAYWARD.

–––

HEADQUARTERS U. S. FORCES, Jefferson City, Mo., August 27, 1861.

Capt. SPEED BUTLER, Saint Louis, Mo.:

... The detachment that left here a few days since to arrest parties for firing into the cars west of here brought in a number of prisoners but from all the evidence they were the most innocent men in the county. I had them liberated.

...

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, August 30, 1861.

Col. J. H. EATON, U. S. Army.

DEAR COLONEL: I inclose a special order on the subject of the policy pursued in North Missouri. This order is based upon a conversation with the general yesterday and before issuing it I wish to submit it to his approval. Will you please present it to him and get his approval? If you will return it to me as soon as you can that I may have it printed and sent off by mail (if the general approves) I shall be much obliged to you.

Very truly, yours,

JNO POPE.

[Inclosure.]

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 13.}

HDQRS. DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 30, 1861.

In compliance with the representations of Governor Gamble, Hon. F. P. Blair and other well known citizens of Missouri and at their earnest request the provisions and requirements of Special [General] Orders, No. 3,* from these headquarters, are hereby suspended. Although it is the firm conviction of the general commanding in North Missouri that good policy and the peace of that section would have dictated the strict enforcement of the order yet he is willing to defer to the earnest wishes of the executive civil authority of the State and of the prominent citizens who are equally solicitous with himself that peace and {p.221} quiet should be re-established in North Missouri. Neither the condition of the people nor the experience of the past month can fairly justify a departure from the policy which already has greatly reduced the extent and character of the disturbances in North Missouri, yet it is hoped that this cordial assent to the suggestions and the warmly expressed opinions of the executive and many of the most prominent citizens of the State will be received by the people in the spirit in which it is accorded and that the hopes of peace and quiet which these gentlemen base upon it will not be disappointed. It is proper, however, to warn the people of North Missouri and of the entire military district over which the commanding general in North Missouri has control that any abuse of this leniency will be instantly followed by results far more severe and difficult to bear than any which are now objected to.

By order of General Pope:

SPEED BUTLER, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

* Order of July 31, 1861, p. 195.

–––

PROCLAMATION.

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, August 30, 1861.*

Circumstances in my judgment are of sufficient urgency to render it necessary that the commanding general of this department should assume the administrative powers of the State. Its disorganized condition, helplessness of civil authority, and the total insecurity of life and devastation of property by bands of murderers and marauders who infest nearly every county in the State and avail themselves of public misfortunes in the vicinity of a hostile force to gratify private and neighborhood vengeance and who find an enemy wherever they find plunder finally demand the severest measures to repress the daily increasing crimes and outrages which are driving off the inhabitants and ruining the State.

In this condition the public safety and success of our arms require unity of purpose without let or hindrance to the prompt administration of affairs. In order therefore to suppress disorders, maintain the public peace and give security to the persons and property of loyal citizens I do hereby extend and declare established martial law throughout the State of Missouri. The lines of the army occupation in this State are for the present declared to extend from Leavenworth by way of posts of Jefferson City, Rolla and Ironton to Cape Girardeau on the Mississippi River. All persons who shall be taken with arms in their hands within these lines shall be tried by court-martial and if found guilty will be shot. Real and personal property of those who shall take up arms against the United States or who shall be directly proven to have taken an active part with their enemies in the field is declared confiscated to public use and their slaves if any they have are hereby declared free men.

All persons who shall be proven to have destroyed after the publication of this order railroad tracks, bridges or telegraph lines shall suffer the extreme penalty of the law. All persons engaged in treasonable correspondence, in giving or procuring aid to the enemy, in {p.222} fermenting turmoil and disturbing public tranquility by creating or circulating false reports or incendiary documents are warned that they are exposing themselves.

All persons who have been led away from allegiance are required to return to their homes forthwith. Any such absence without sufficient cause will be held to be presumptive evidence against them.

The object of this declaration is to place in the hands of military authorities power to give instantaneous effect to the existing laws and supply such deficiencies as the conditions of the war demand, but it is not intended to suspend the ordinary tribunals of the country where law will be administered by civil officers in the usual manner and with their customary authority while the same can be peaceably administered.

The commanding general will labor vigilantly for the public welfare and by his efforts for their safety hopes to obtain not only acquiescence but active support of the people of the country.

J. C. FRÉMONT, Major-General, Commanding.

* See M. Jeff. Thompson’s retaliatory proclamation, September 2, at p. 181.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 6.}

HDQRS. WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, Mo., August 30, 1861.

The commanding general sincerely regrets that he finds it necessary to make any reproach to the patriotic army under his command. He had hoped that the rigid enforcement of discipline and the good example of the mass of the enlightened soldiery which he has the honor to lead would have been sufficient to correct in good time the irregularities and license of a few who have reflected discredit upon our cause and ourselves. But the extension of martial law to all the State of Missouri rendered suddenly necessary by its unhappy condition renders it equally imperative to call the army to good order and rigorous discipline.

They are reminded that the power to inflict the extraordinary severities of the now governing law is rigidly confined to few who are to be held strictly accountable for its exercise.

They are also reminded that the same necessity which requires the establishment of martial law demands also the enforcement of the military law which governs themselves with the same sudden severity. The commanding general therefore strictly prohibits all vexatious proceedings calculated unnecessarily to harass the citizens and also unauthorized searches, seizures and destruction of property except in cases of military necessity and for which the officer authorizing or permitting it will be held strictly and personally responsible. All officers commanding districts, posts or detachments are enjoined to use the utmost prudence and circumspection in the discharge of their duties. Under the circumstances a strict obedience to orders, close attention to duties and an earnest effort to protect and to avoid harassing innocent persons is requested and expected everywhere from officers and men.

The commanding general trusts that he will find few occasions to reproach the troops. He hopes and believes that he will find many to admire and commend them.

By order of Major-General Frémont:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

{p.223}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 31, 1861.

Colonel WILLIAMS, [Third] Iowa Regiment, Brookfield.

COLONEL: Immediately upon receipt of this letter you will proceed to Palmyra with all the effective men of your command, leaving the Missouri regiment (Morgan’s) to occupy Brookfield and guard the public stores there. The object of your movement is to open the road which is reported to be obstructed near Palmyra and occupy Palmyra so as to insure the safety of travel. You will at once dispatch a messenger to General Hurlbut with the inclosed order and make sure that he gets it. You can send for your regimental baggage as soon as the road is clear as your station for some time to come will be Palmyra or Hannibal.

I am, colonel, your obedient servant,

[JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.]

[Inclosure.]

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTH MISSOURI, Saint Louis, August 31, 1861.

Brigadier-General HURLBUT, Kirksville.

GENERAL: Upon the receipt of this order and without the least delay you will move with your force upon Palmyra and reopen the road which has been obstructed. I cannot conceive how you could have remained ten days at Kirksville and allowed Green’s forces to interrupt travel and commit outrages unopposed all through Marion County. Break up your camp at once and march on Palmyra. Moore is ordered to follow you and 500 of Bussey’s cavalry will be sent from Keokuk to Hannibal. You have force enough and to spare and great surprise and dissatisfaction is expressed at department headquarters at your unexplained delay at Kirksville. Mr. Cassel will hand you orders concerning Paris which you will execute at once.

Respectfully, sir, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, September 4, 1861.

Col. J. C. DAVIS, Commanding, Jefferson City.

SIR: The major-general commanding orders that you cause Captain Magoffin, taken prisoner at Georgetown, Mo., to be sent forthwith with all other prisoners of the same character to the arsenal of this city. Send copies of accusations against them.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. H. EATON, Major, U. S. Army, and Military Secretary.

{p.224}

–––

TROY, MO., September 5, 1861.

General JOHN C. FRÉMONT.

SIR: The committee of safety for the county of Lincoln appointed under the special order of Brigadier-General Pope in his absence from his headquarters at Saint Louis beg leave to report to you the condition of affairs in our county.

We have made several reports to General Pope of the movements of armed bodies of men in and through our county telling him that we were unable to control such movements within ourselves, and with the means of defense in the hands of our people and the general feeling toward us it would be impossible to disperse and break up the organization in our county while all the surrounding counties contribute to increase the members making the force entirely beyond our control.

For several days past quite a stir has been going on amongst these forces. Men have been gathering in from different quarters until now they are several hundred strong though considerably scattered. They have no regular encampment but we are informed that they have a camp of instruction at which they meet from day to day for military exercise. This place of meeting is situated about six miles south of Troy and about the same distance north of Millville on the North Missouri railroad.

Within the last few days several complaints have been made to us of depredations committed by small parties belonging to this organization upon some of our citizens. We have remonstrated against such proceedings and have succeeded in one or two instances of having horses restored that were taken. As yet we have heard of no threats or acts of violence toward any one. All is quiet with the exceptions mentioned. We see no signs of a forward movement of the forces around us; they will probably remain as they are unless disturbed. There is a continual passing in and out of our town of these men. They go to and fro without molestation making no disturbance with the exception of occasional noisy demonstrations produced from the effects of bad whisky. And if you will allow us the suggestion while on this point if the same regulations in regard to dram-shops as exist in Saint Louis were extended to this and every other county in the State the peace of the country generally would be better preserved. Give no permits to dram sellers or liquor dealers in any town or village unless recommended by a majority of the citizens through the committee of safety and the result will be for the general good of the people. As the condition of affairs demand we will report from time to time.

We are, truly, yours,

C. W. PARKER AND OTHERS, Committee.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, September 6, 1861.

Brigadier-General STURGIS, Commanding at Arsenal.

SIR: In order to put a stop to the robberies and violence committed by the rebel hordes under Green who are now assembled at Shelbina to the number of about 3,000 and who have cut off Colonel Williams from his eastern communication lines I have resolved upon a combined attack on the rebels and their annihilation.

...

J. C. FRÉMONT, Major. General, Commanding.

{p.225}

–––

FORT LEAVENWORTH, KANS., September 7, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT:

The communications by rail and wire entirely cut off on the Hannibal and Saint Joseph. Lane reports the enemy’s column marching on Lexington. Can a force attack from Jefferson City while Lane attacks from the west?

W. E. PRINCE.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Fort Leavenworth, Kans., September 9, 1861.

General J. H. LANE, Commanding Kansas Brigade, Port Lincoln, Kans.

GENERAL:

...

I hope you will adopt early and active measures to crush out this marauding which is being enacted in Captain Jennison’s name as also yours by a band of men representing themselves as belonging to your command. Captain Wilder will be able to give the details of their conduct at Leavenworth City, and doubtless their atrocities in other localities have been already represented to you. Please have a formal examination into the plundering of private and public buildings which has recently taken place as I am informed at Fort Scott. It will be necessary for representation to higher authority and for the adjustment of the accounts of disbursing officers.

...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

W. E. PRINCE, Captain, First Infantry, Commanding.

–––

BROOKFIELD, September 11, 1861.

Maj. Gen. JOHN C. FRÉMONT:

I have command of this post some days but must have four pieces of artillery if I hold it much longer. The rebels are concentrating around in every direction and I know we will be attacked before long. This post and stores and round-house must be held; Over 200 of my command are aiding to build the Platte River bridge near Saint Joseph. No communication with General Pope since he has been on the road. Fifteen hundred of Green’s forces commenced crossing the river about Glasgow yesterday, forty-five miles from here.

W. JAS. MORGAN, Colonel.

–––

HUDSON, September 12, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT:

It is altogether untrue that any bridges or culverts have been destroyed between this place and Hannibal as stated in the papers. Since my arrival in this section a trestle-work was destroyed by Green. It was repaired and day before yesterday spread out as the train passed over. It was a simple accident, it is now repaired and the {p.226} road is clear to Platte River. The news that Green has crossed at Glasgow is undoubted. He has carried out of North Missouri a large part of the ruffians and bridge-burners who have committed outrages. Within a few days all will be quiet again. I go forward to Saint Joseph and thence to Keokuk. I will have Glasgow and Brunswick immediately visited by a strong force, and as soon as the regiments of (Mover, Moore, Tindall and Foster are ready I will turn the regiments to the line of the Missouri River.

JNO. POPE.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, U. S. ARMY, Saint Louis, September 14, 1861.

Col. T. T. TAYLOR, Commanding at Springfield.

SIR: Yours of the 8th instant* containing an erroneous construction of my proclamation dated on the 30th ultimo has had my attention. I understand the object of your note to be to inquire whether it was my intention to shoot the wounded who might be taken prisoners by the forces under my command. The following paragraph extracted from the proclamation will be strictly enforced within the lines prescribed against the class of offenders for whom it was intended, viz:

All persons who shall be taken with arms in their hands within these lines shall be tried by court-martial and if found guilty will be shot.

The lines are expressly declared to be those of the army in the military occupation of this State. You have wholly misapprehended the meaning of the proclamation. Without undertaking to determine the condition of any man engaged in this rebellion I desire it to be clearly understood that the proclamation is intended distinctly to recognize all the usual rights of an open enemy in the field and to be in all respects strictly conformable to the ordinary usages of war. It is hardly necessary for me to say that it was not prepared with any purpose to ignore the ordinary rights of humanity with respect to wounded men or to those who are humanely engaged in alleviating their sufferings.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. C. FRÉMONT, Major-General, Commanding.

* Omitted.

–––

SAINT JOE, September 15, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT:

Road to Hannibal open except Platte River bridge (finished tomorrow) and all quiet. Secessionists numbering some 2,500 in detached bands retreating southward to cross river below Independence. I have sent column of 1,000 men and three pieces of artillery under Colonel Smith to march rapidly from this place in pursuit, and the Iowa regiment with one piece of artillery and fifty irregular horse to move rapidly from Cameron upon Liberty and there effect junction with Smith. There is no doubt in my judgment that the large train of plunder will be captured, though as usual I presume the forces will disperse, and being cavalry will mostly escape unless Smith can surprise them. I have put all irregular forces-home guards and others-in motion scouting the country on all sides. Colonels Cranor and Edwards-the first commanding irregular forces of Missouri Volunteers, {p.227} the second about 600 Iowa State troops-will be here to-day having swept whole region north of this place clean. I put them immediately in motion along both sides of railroad to clean out the small squads remaining in the woods from Saint Joseph to Chillicothe. In five days North Missouri will be again quiet and the regiments of Tindall, Moore, Foster, Morgan and Glover will return. So you will please send Tindall’s regiment as soon as possible to Chillicothe.

I go east to-day to urge into the field the regiments named. There are some disturbances of minor importance in the extreme northeast and I must get to Canton and Keokuk without awaiting the return of Smith’s command. Can Glover and Bussey get their cavalry armed at once?

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General.

–––

HUDSON, MO., September 16, 1861.

General FRÉMONT:

Just arrived here on my way to Keokuk. Find Ohio regiments on their way to Utica. If you can send Tindall’s regiment to Chillicothe immediately the Sixteenth Illinois and Third Iowa can also be forwarded to Lexington. There will be no more considerable trouble in North Missouri.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General.

–––

QUINCY, ILL., September 17, 1861.

Major-General FRÉMONT:

Arrived here last night but did not find boat I had requested to be sent from Saint Louis to carry me from Canton to Keokuk. Cannot do my business without her. There is now no difficulty in North Missouri nor do I believe that fifty armed men can get together in the region south of Knox and Lewis Counties. Shall be up there as soon as I can get a boat. Railroad all clear and will remain so and will return to Saint Louis as soon as I finish up the river. Bussey and Glover need their cavalry arms.

JNO. POPE.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Franklin, October 15, [1861].

Col. J. H. EATON, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General:

Big River bridge seven miles below De Soto on Iron Mountain Railroad was burned last night. I have no particulars and don’t understand it as a sufficient guard was there. Shall go down to see to it and will telegraph.

CHESTER HARDING, JR., Brigadier-General.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 1.}

HEADQUARTERS, Quincy, Ill., October 17, 1861.

I. Having been assigned to duty in Northeastern Missouri by instructions from Brigadier-General Prentiss, commanding, dated Jefferson {p.228} City, October 17, 1861, the undersigned hereby assumes command of all that territory bordering on and lying north of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad.

II. All orders now in force will be continued until further orders.

J. B. S. TODD, Brigadier-General, Commanding Northeast Missouri.

–––

HEADQUARTERS POST, Rolla, Mo., October 24, 1861.

Capt. CHAUNCEY MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General, Saint Louis, Mo.

CAPTAIN: I have as prisoners several of the Harris and Wood gang of rebels and thieves who have been the terror of all Union men in the adjoining counties. Most of them are members of Johnson’s band and have murdered, robbed and committed almost all other crimes against Union men. The evidence against them is mostly in the adjoining counties and hard to procure. Several of them once took the oath. What shall I do with them?

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

G. M. DODGE, Colonel, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, October 26, 1861.

Col. G. M. DODGE, Fourth Iowa Volunteers, Commanding, Rolla, Mo.

SIR: Your letter of the 24th instant in relation to prisoners taken belonging to Harris’s and Wood’s gang of rebels has been received. In reply I beg leave to state that I do not know what disposition can be made with these men as there is no military commission in session here. I think, however, the best course to have pursued would have been to have shot them when they were captured.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHAUNCEY MCKEEVER, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, November 16, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK, Commanding Department of the West.

DEAR SIR: Permit a stranger to submit the following suggestive remarks: Many of the older and more substantial citizens are of the opinion that a decided majority of the people of Missouri last spring were Union in sentiment. Now excluding the Germans certainly not less than three-fourths are secessionists at heart. In the earlier part of spring commenced the formal organization of citizens of avowed rebel sentiments into companies and regiments to aid in destroying the Federal Government, or informally into bands under ringleaders without even the color of commissions from either the State or Southern Confederacy, having the avowed object of exercising arbitrary surveillance over the person and property of loyal citizens if not also by {p.229} intimidation driving them from the State. Since the initiation of these organizations anarchy has measurably prevailed and both parties have been and are yet in open armed antagonism. The Federal Army was driven from its extreme southern occupation of Carthage, the State penetrated beyond its center by the Confederate Army, aided and abetted in its march by large masses of Missourians operating singly, in squads, by individual organizations of great numerical strength, all, however, united in besieging and reducing the Federal intrenchments at Lexington; all since, however, retiring-the Confederate Army to the border, its followers to their local field of operation or to their homes, the former followed by a large Federal Army to a position in the rear of that possessed in the spring.

Thus practically closes the campaign of 1861 in Missouri. The result: the abandonment of the State by a large moiety of her best and most industrious citizens; the devastation of the property and utter ruin of a still larger portion; the rendering inoperative of civil law if not in fact its surrender to the martial and the chiefs of the marauding gangs; the utter and complete destruction of the industry and prosperity that characterized the State; the rendering it hazardous to the person or life of the law-abiding citizen to pass alone through nearly or quite every county in the State, and last but not least disaffected a material portion of the citizens, rousing the majority in the State as remarked in the outset to secession-all principally attributable I apprehend to tolerating the organization into squads and armies the disaffected of the State instead of seizing upon the leaders before their plans were fully developed, and to the rose-water policy pursued with them after committing overt acts.

The secessionists can very properly be divided and classed as follows: first, those who are in sympathy and heart only with the Confederates; second, those who abandon their homes and regularly enlist in the rebel army participating in its fortunes; third, those who compose the guerrilla portion. The two first may be said to command a certain amount of respect-the one for his neutrality the other as a belligerent-while the third is to be despised as a sneak, highwayman and bandit. It is this last class who afford the information, aid and comfort absolutely necessary to enable the Confederate Army to successfully penetrate the State from Arkansas. It is the ringleaders of this class whom it is necessary to reach and summarily treat before peace can prevail in Missouri; for without their aid and instigation the followers are harmless by reason of natural imbecility and lack of courage and the Southern army deprived and made nearly inoperative in the State for their countenance. It is not sufficient to deal with the ringleaders by arresting and imprisoning them through form of law: they must be seized singly at times and places (such as at their own fireside) when least expected; and if they offer the least resistance to be instantly shot, otherwise to be for form sake tried by military commission and forthwith shot.

Probably 100 seizures made on this principle in the State within thirty to sixty days at times and places to not indicate design or concert of action, &c., will do more to secure peace to the State than the entire army, and prevent the assassination hereafter of hundreds of loyal, peaceable citizens, besides the loss of the thousands who will fall in battle and by disease. You will perceive that I draw a marked distinction between secessionists and propose only to treat in a summary manner the ringleaders, the others being left to the-civil law or to the fate of the vanquished in honorable warfare. The reason I advise summary {p.230} dealing with ringleaders only originates from an extensive knowledge and dealing second to but few with the class of men thus to be directly or indirectly affected, it being the most immediately effective and potent cure for the mania permeating the minds of persons engaged in law-defying combinations such as the marauding parties of Missouri, mobs and banditti.

My apology for this letter originates in the fact that bankruptcy stares myself and all others in the face unless this war is speedily terminated and the States en masse restored to their former peaceful relation, firmly believing that the policy suggested if carried out will soon enable the mass of the Federal Army to be withdrawn from the State leaving the onus of preserving peace where it rightfully belongs-upon its own citizens.

I am, with the highest consideration, your obedient servant,

ERASMUS GEST.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, November 20, 1861. (Received November 20).

General MCCLELLAN, For the President of the United States:

No written authority is found here to declare and enforce martial law in this department. Please send me such written authority and telegraph me that it has been sent by mail.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

[Indorsement.]

NOVEMBER 21, 1861.

If General McClellan and General Halleck deem it necessary to declare and maintain martial law at Saint Louis the same is hereby authorized.

A. LINCOLN.

–––

HEADQUARTERS TWENTY-SEVENTH MISSOURI VOLUNTEERS, Sedalia, Mo., November 23, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK.

SIR: Will you permit me as a citizen of Missouri and one who has taken a deep interest in sustaining the Union cause in our State, devoting my time and money as freely as any other man, to make a statement in regard to the condition of affairs in Western Missouri between the Osage and Missouri Rivers? ... The population in part of this part of the State are wealthy and desperate men and will do just as good fighting without a general as with one.

Hence the peculiar state of affairs which exists among us as a people at this time. Murder, rapine and robbery pervade every county and neighborhood in this part of the State where there are no U. S. troops. No man or his family or property will be safe a single day after he is known to be a Union man or sympathizes with our efforts to sustain the Government and its authority over our State. Nothing but prompt and energetic measures on the part of our Government will save our population from murder and starvation. The rebels have {p.231} declared that no Union man shall remain in this part of the State and you may rest assured that they mean to do just what they say. If the Government intends to extend protection to the people of Western Missouri it must be done at the earliest day possible or it will not be worth protecting as the rebels are stealing and robbing the Union citizens of money, personal property, such as cattle, horses, mules, hogs, sheep, household goods, bed clothing and even the wearing apparel of the females of Union families.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

JAMES D. EADS, Colonel Twenty-seventh Missouri Volunteers.

–––

HDQRS. OF THE ARMY, ADJUTANT-GENERAL’S OFFICE, Washington, November 25, 1861.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, U. S. Army, Commanding Department of the Missouri, Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: In reply to your telegram of the 20th instant the general-in-chief desires you to give your views more fully as to the necessity of enforcing martial law in your department, and if you think the necessity is sufficiently pressing for such a step to mention the names and addresses of the officers to whom you think the power should be given.

I am, sir, &c.,

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.

–––

PROCLAMATION.

[KANSAS CITY, MO., November 27, 1861.]

To THE PEOPLE OF JACKSON, LAFAYETTE, CASS, JOHNSON, AND PETTIS COUNTIES, MO.:

I have come among you with my command under the authority of the General Government for the purpose of protecting the supply trains and all other property of the United States Government and for the purpose of throwing a shield of protection and defense around all men who are loyal to that Government.

No excesses will be committed by any soldier in my command.

We march to enforce the laws and sustain the Government. Every loyal citizen is expected to give evidence of his loyalty by active efforts for the protection of the flag. For four months our armies have marched through your country; your professed friendship has been a fraud; your oaths of allegiance have been shams and perjuries. You feed the rebel army; you act as spies while clamming to be true to the Union. We do not care about your past political opinions; no man will be persecuted because he differs from us. But neutrality is ended. It you are patriots you must fight; if you are traitors you will be punished.

The time for fighting has come. Every man who feeds, harbors, protects or in any way gives aid and comfort to the enemies of the Union will be held responsible for his treason with his life and property. While all the property of Union men and all their rights will be religiously respected traitors will everywhere be treated as outlaws–enemies {p.232} of God and men-too base to hold any description of property and having no rights which loyal men are bound to respect. The last dollar and the last slave of rebels will be taken and turned over to the General Government.

Playing war is played out, and whenever Union troops are fired upon the answer will boom from cannon and desolation will follow treason. Loyal citizens will be fully remunerated for all property taken from them for the use of the army.

All land between Fort Leavenworth and the headquarters of the Army of the West is under the jurisdiction of the United States and we propose to have a regular road over it and sure communication through it no matter at what cost of rebel treasure and blood.

It is hoped that you will see the necessity of abiding by the laws and actively sustaining them. But if you raise an arm against the Government we have sworn to protect the course I have briefly marked out I will follow to the letter.

C. R. JENNISON, Colonel, Commanding Seventh Kansas Cavalry.

–––

HEADQUARTERS SECOND DIVISION, Syracuse, November 28, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON:

I have two prisoners in my possession one of whom was taken with arms in his hands; the other was an expressman sent forward to advise the guerrilla party camped near Marshall of the approach of the forces sent from this command. Both belong to the guerrilla parties which have so long infested Missouri and which make war regardless of all law and obligation of authority. I have the honor to request to know what disposition to make of such prisoners as they are taken every day.

I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant,

[JNO. POPE,] Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, November 30, 1861.

Maj. Gen. GEORGE B. MCCLELLAN, Commander-in-Chief, Washington, D. C.

GENERAL: There can be no doubt that the enemy is moving north with a large force and that a considerable part of Northern Missouri is in a state of insurrection. The rebels have organized in many counties, taken Union men prisoners, and are robbing them of horses, wagons, provisions, clothing, &c. There is as yet no large gathering in any one place so that we can strike them.

To punish these outrages and to arrest the traitors who are organizing these forces and furnishing supplies it is necessary to use the military power and enforce martial law. I cannot arrest such men and seize their papers without exercising martial law for there is no civil law or civil authority to reach them. The safety of Missouri requires the prompt and immediate exercise of this power, and if the President is not willing to intrust me with it he should relieve me from the command. It is and has been for months exercised here by my predecessors but I cannot find any written authority of the President for doing {p.233} so. I mean to act strictly under authority and according to instructions and where authority will not be granted the Government must not hold me responsible for the result.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

Maj. Gen. HENRY W. HALLECK, Commanding in the Department of Missouri.

GENERAL: As an insurrection exists in the United States and is in arms in the State of Missouri you are hereby authorized and empowered to suspend the writ of habeas corpus within the limits of the military division under your command and to exercise martial law as you find it necessary in your discretion to secure the public safety and the authority of the United States.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed at Washington, this 2d day of December, A. D. 1861.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

By the President:

WM. H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF SOUTHEAST MISSOURI, Cairo, December 4, 1861.

Col. L. F. Ross, Commanding U. S. Forces, Cape Girardeau, Mo.:

Your communication of yesterday is received and the following instructions are given in reply: You will require Colonel Murdoch to give over to the quartermaster all property taken by them from citizens of Missouri. Such as may be reclaimed by owners you will direct to be returned unless taken from persons directly giving aid and comfort to the enemy. When, you know of depredations being committed by armed bodies of rebels within reach of you you can use your own discretion about the propriety of suppressing them. I know your views about allowing troops to interpret the confiscation laws therefore no instructions are required on this point.

One thing I will add: In cases of outrageous marauding I would fully justify shooting the perpetrators down if caught in the act-I mean our own men as well as the enemy. When you are satisfied that Thompson’s men are coming in with honest intentions you may swear them, but in this matter I would advise great caution. As a rule it would be better to keep them entirely out of your camp or confine them as prisoners of war. A few examples of confinement would prevent others from coming in.

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 13.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, Mo., December 4, 1861.

I. Lieut. Col. Bernard G. Farrar is hereby appointed provost-marshal-general of this department. Capt. George E. Leighton is provost-marshal {p.234} of the city of Saint Louis and its vicinity. All local provost-marshals will be subject to the orders of the provost-marshal-general who will receive his instructions direct from these headquarters.

II. It is represented that there are numerous rebels and spies within our camps and in the territory occupied by our troops who give information, aid and assistance to the enemy; that rebels scattered through the country threaten and drive out loyal citizens and rob them of their property; that they furnish the enemy with arms, provisions, clothing, horses and means of transportation; and that insurgents are banding together in several of the interior counties for the purpose of assisting the enemy to rob, to maraud and to lay waste the country. All such persons are by the laws of war in every civilized country liable to capital punishment. The mild and indulgent course heretofore pursued toward this class of men has utterly failed to restrain them from such unlawful conduct. The safety of the country and the protection of the lives and property of loyal citizens justify and require the enforcement of a more severe policy. Peace and war cannot exist together. We cannot at the same time extend to rebels the rights of peace and enforce against them the penalties of war. They have forfeited their civil fights as citizens by making war against the Government and upon their own heads must fall the consequences.

III. Commanding officers of districts, posts and corps will arrest and place in confinement all persons in arms against the lawful authorities of the United States, or who give aid, assistance or encouragement to the enemy. The evidence against persons so arrested will be reduced to writing and verified on oath and the originals or certified copies of such affidavits will be immediately furnished to the provost-marshal-general in this city. All arms, ammunition and other personal property required for the use of the army, such as horses, wagons, provisions, &c., belonging to persons so in arms or so assisting and encouraging the enemy will be taken possession of and turned over and accounted for. Such property not of a proper character for issue will be examined by a board of officers and sold as directed by the Army Regulations.

IV. Commissions will be ordered from these headquarters for the trial of persons charged with aiding and assisting the enemy, the destruction of bridges, roads and buildings, and the taking of public or private property for hostile purposes and also for the condemnation of property taken by our forces from disloyal inhabitants for the use of the army.

V. In all certificates given for private property taken for public use in accordance with General Orders, No. 8, of this department, it will be stated whether the property was taken from loyal or disloyal persons and as a test of the loyalty of persons claiming to be such from whom property is so taken officers commanding districts, posts, divisions or separate brigades are authorized to appoint some competent and reliable officer to require and administer the usual oath of allegiance to the United States.

VI. All persons found in disguise as pretended loyal citizens or under other false pretenses within our lines giving information to or communicating with the enemy will be arrested, tried, condemned and shot as spies. It should be remembered that in this respect the laws of war make no distinction of sex; all are liable to the same penalty.

VII. Persons not commissioned or enlisted in the service of the so-called Confederate States who commit acts of hostility will not be {p.235} treated as prisoners of war but will be held and punished as criminals. And all persons found guilty of murder, robbery, theft, pillaging and marauding under whatever authority will either be shot or otherwise less severely punished as is prescribed by the Rules and Articles of War or authorized by the usages and customs of war in like cases.

VIII. The law of military retaliation has fixed and well-established rules. While it allows no cruel or barbarous acts on our part in retaliation for like acts of the enemy, it permits any retaliatory measures within the prescribed limits of military usage. If the enemy murders and robs Union men we are not justified in murdering and robbing other persons who are in a legal sense enemies to our Government but we may enforce on them the severest penalties justified by the laws of war for the crimes of their fellow rebels. The rebel forces in the southwestern counties of this State have robbed and plundered the peaceful non-combatant inhabitants, taking from them their clothing and means of subsistence. Men, women and children have alike been stripped and plundered. Thousands of such persons are finding their way to this city bare-footed, half clad and-in a destitute and starving condition. Humanity and justice require that these sufferings should be relieved and that the outrages committed upon them should be retaliated upon the enemy. The individuals who have directly caused these sufferings are at present mostly beyond our reach; but there are in this city and in other places within our lines numerous wealthy secessionists who render aid, assistance and encouragement to those who commit these outrages. They do not themselves rob and plunder but they abet and countenance these acts in others; although less bold they are equally guilty. It is therefore ordered and directed that the provost-marshals immediately inquire into the condition of the persons so driven from their homes and that measures be taken to quarter them in the houses and to feed and clothe them at the expense of avowed secessionists and of those who are found guilty of giving aid, assistance and encouragement to the enemy.

IX. The laws of the United States confiscate the property of any master in a slave used for insurrectionary purposes. Should Congress extend this penalty to the property of all rebels in arms, or giving aid, assistance and encouragement to the enemy such provisions will be strictly enforced. Military officers do not make laws but they should obey and enforce them when made.

X. Where the necessities of service require it the forced labor of citizens, slaves and even prisoners of war may be employed in the construction of military defenses, but no one will be forced to such labor without orders from these headquarters, except in case of siege or attack. All persons so impressed will be fed and quartered at the public expense and an account be taken of their labor to be settled as may be directed by the War Department. All such working parties will be strictly guarded and kept as far as possible from communicating with the command where employed.

XI. These orders may by some be regarded as severe but they are certainly justified by the laws of war and it is believed they are not only right but necessary; it is therefore expected that all loyal citizens in this department will assist the military authorities in strictly enforcing them. There is already a large military force in this State which is daily increasing in numbers and improving in organization and discipline. In a few weeks this force will be able not only to expel or punish all traitors and rebels but also to strike the enemy in his strongholds.

{p.236}

XII. All communications relating to prisoners of war will be directed to the provost-marshal-general to be by him laid before the commanding general daily at orderly hours.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SEDALIA, December 9, 1861.

General HALLECK:

Colonel Magoffin, C. S. Army, asks for an interview with me. Shall I grant it? They say he is tired of the war.

F. STEELE, Colonel, &c.

–––

SEDALIA, December 9, 1861.

General POPE, Syracuse:

Several loyal citizens have requested me to give Colonel Magoffin a safeguard to go home to see his wife die; she cannot last but a day or two. Please answer immediately.

F. STEELE, Colonel, Commanding.

[Indorsement.]

What shall be done? I have telegraphed that if Colonel Magoffin will give his parole he can be permitted to go on, otherwise I cannot.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General.

–––

SEDALIA, December 21, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK:

Prisoners and arms go down to-morrow. I find among the prisoners after telegraphing you the notorious Colonel Magoffin who has lately violated his parole. He was conspicuous in the skirmish. I send him under charge of the guard in close confinement, Col. J. C. Davis goes in charge. His conduct was distinguished and will be properly noticed in my report. I hope he will not be detained in Saint Louis as he is much needed here.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Otterville, December 22, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK:

I beg to state in reference to prisoners sent down in charge of Colonel Davis that much care should be observed in the examination and disposal of them which perhaps the provost-marshal-general in Saint Louis may not give. Many of the prisoners are the most dangerous men in this whole State and have been the most active and influential {p.237} in fomenting disturbances. One in particular, a Doctor Smith, is a man of large wealth owning nearly 200 negroes. Some of them are not legitimately connected with the rebel forces and not entitled to the rights of prisoners of war. I suggest this to you lest some mistake be made in the office of the provost-marshal and men dangerous to the peace in a much greater degree and with less excuse than officers or enlisted men be turned loose on the country.

I am, general, respectfully, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 32.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, Mo., December 22, 1861.

I. Insurgent rebels scattered through the northern counties of this State which are occupied by our troops under the guise of peaceful citizens have resumed their occupation of burning bridges and destroying railroads and telegraph wires. These men are guilty of the highest crime known to the code of war and the punishment is death. Any one caught in the act will be immediately shot, and any one accused of this crime will be arrested and placed in close confinement until his case can be examined by a military commission and if found guilty he also will suffer death.

II. Where injuries are done to railroads or telegraph lines the commanding officer of the nearest post will immediately impress into service for repairing damages the slaves of all secessionists in the vicinity and if necessary the secessionists themselves and their property. Any pretended Union man having information of intended attempts to destroy such roads and lines or of the guilty parties who does not communicate such intention to the proper authorities and give aid and assistance in arresting and punishing them will be regarded as particeps criminis and treated accordingly.

III. Hereafter the towns and counties in which such destruction of public property takes place will be made to pay the expenses of all repairs unless it be shown that the people of such towns or counties could not have prevented it on account of the superior force of the enemy.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 23, 1861.

Brig. Gen. B. M. PRENTISS, Palmyra, Mo.:

You will immediately repair to North Missouri Railroad and take command of forces there. Our troops are moving from Jefferson City, Hermann, Warrenton and Troy against bridge-burners. Kill or capture them. Keep me advised of your movements and force.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

{p.238}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 23, 1861.

Lieut. Col. FRANK J. HERRON, Commanding, Pacific City, Mo.:

Look out for bridge-burners. It is reported that concerted attempts will be made to destroy railroads and telegraph lines. Shoot down every one making the attempt.

H. W. HALLECK, Major. General.

NOTE.-A like telegram was sent to the following places: Commanding officer at Sedalia, Otterville, Syracuse, Tipton, Jefferson City, Hermann, Rolla, Sulphur Springs, Mineral Point, Ironton, Chillicothe, Cameron, and St. Joseph.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 14.

You are hereby ordered to immediately cause to be destroyed all railroad bridges and telegraph wires in your vicinity.

By command of Maj. Gen. S. Price:

HENRY LITTLE, Assistant Adjutant-General.*

* Confederate. Printed as received-without date or address. This order was probably issued several days earlier than the Halleck dispatch preceding it, but it is inserted here for the obvious purpose of making more clear some of the events of this period.

–––

HEADQUARTERS EIGHTEENTH MISSOURI VOLUNTEERS, Camp Osborn, December 24, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK, Saint Louis.

DEAR GENERAL: I send you the proclamation which I had caused to be issued for this rebellious district and which I think is producing a very salutary effect. This is reported the most wealthy county in the State outside of Saint Louis and has been built up with the products of the soil sold to the Government at Fort Leavenworth. I have sworn in about 800 citizens and I have two arrested for stating that they did not regard the oath. I think if I have them shot and make an example I can have peace and the parties who take the oath will regard it in future. Please advise me what course to pursue or leave it to my own discretion.

I remain yours, with esteem,

W. JAMES MORGAN, Colonel, Commanding this District.

[Inclosure.]

PROCLAMATION.

WESTON, December 9, 1861.

To THE CITIZENS OF WESTON AND PLATTE COUNTY:

By orders from headquarters of the Army of North Missouri I occupy the city of Weston and surrounding country with the force under my {p.239} command and take charge of the Platte County railroad. Two bridges had been destroyed within six miles of this town which I have repaired, and now I call upon and expect the loyal citizens of this county to aid me in keeping it from being further disturbed. If any man knowingly allows said road, the engines, cars or other property belonging to it to be injured without giving me immediate notice he shall be held responsible. If necessary for the protection of the road I shall cause troops to be stationed at or near the different bridges occupying the houses and buildings belonging to the rebels in the neighborhood. My regiment was raised in Missouri and it is my hearty wish to cultivate a friendly feeling wherever it may be stationed. I came among you for the sole purpose of giving protection to the loyal people or those who may desire to become so and I wish to encourage all lawful pursuits and avocations.

It has been reported to me that many citizens have left their homes and families scattering themselves through the country. All such I desire to have return at once and become good, loyal citizens. They and their property shall be protected when they give evidence of loyalty. I have appointed Maj. Alfred Williams to act as provost-marshal for the city of Weston and County of Platte. Every person leaving the city or county will be required to obtain a passport from him. No negro will be allowed inside of camp lines without a written permit from his master and a pass from the provost-marshal, and especially will they in no case be allowed to go from the State without express orders from their master and the provost-marshal.

All fire-arms and ammunition in this city and vicinity not in possession of officers or soldiers in the U. S. service must be delivered up to the provost-marshal except with express license to the contrary. All squads of armed men found spying about the country will be shot. This will be rigidly adhered to.

W. JAMES MORGAN, colonel Eighteenth Regiment Missouri Vols., Commanding Post.

–––

COLUMBIA, MO., December 26, 1861.

General HALLECK:

I returned last night from Colonel Birge’s camp at Centralia on the North Missouri Railroad, and at the time of my leaving he was preparing to march toward Sturgeon, ten miles west, where Lieutenant-Colonel Compton with several companies was stationed and where his headquarters will be for the present. Colonel Birge although without cavalry is doing good service, but would be much more efficient if half of his men were mounted.

The woods skirting the prairies swarm with armed rebels on horseback and if you want the men who burned the bridges and who tore up the track of the railroad now is the time to strike. Many of them are known for many of them live in this town and county and along the line of the road. We have their names, know then and they can be taken; but to do this cavalry is required and required now. Infantry especially in this rigorous weather can do little else than guard prisoners and camp-stores. This arm of the service never can strike effectually the bushwhackers and bridge-burners who infest the country.

I write therefore earnestly to urge you to order from Jefferson City or elsewhere to this place where we have excellent quarters for soldiers three or four companies of cavalry, assuring you that they will very {p.240} soon send to your headquarters scores of the rebel incendiaries and returned soldiers from Price’s army. Of the latter the country is full. There are at least from ten to twenty in this town at this moment.

The great number of returned rebel soldiers throughout this and other counties north of the river induces the suggestion that in all probability it is the purpose of Price to get most of his army over here scattered all through the country, and finally if possible to cross over himself and by a preconcerted movement assemble in full force at some prearranged point. He may look to the freezing of the river as a means of crossing it.

Be this as it may now is the time to strike the bridge-burners and scatter the roving bands of rebels who are destroying the peace of the country, pillaging Union men of their property and arresting them.

Two or three companies of Colonel Birge’s sharpshooters might be quartered for the winter in this place, with a cavalry force to scour the country to strike the vandals and disperse bands of armed rebels. Infantry cannot do this. If you wish it done; if you wish to avoid the necessity of having to fight on the south side of the river thousands upon thousands of armed secessionists send us on the north side a few companies of cavalry (to stay here) and the work will be done.

Very truly,

[W. F. SWITZLER.]

–––

OTTERVILLE, December 27, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK.

DEAR SIR: This letter will inform you that myself and many other loyal citizens residing in the south portion of Benton and the north portion of Dallas and Hickory Counties have been driven from our homes and have had to leave all that we possessed to be devoured by a worse than savage enemy and fly for refuge to the Federal army stationed along the railroad. I find the Federal army at many points on the railroad badly furnished with winter quarters, and I think if you would send as many as two regiments to Warsaw, the county seat of Benton County, thirty-three miles south of Sedalia, they would find empty houses enough for comfortable winter quarters and also give protection to many good, loyal citizens and save a vast amount of property that is now being stolen and destroyed by small guerrilla bands of rebels that are now ravaging the country. If two or three regiments of infantry and two or three companies of cavalry to act as scouts were stationed at Warsaw to give protection to the country the telegraph could very soon be put in operation to Warsaw which would greatly facilitate our communication with the southwest. We, however, submit all to your wiser judgment, and sincerely hope that an unerring Providence will direct you to make such a disposition of our army as will soonest put down the rebellion and restore peace and happiness to our beloved country.

THOMAS JACKMAN.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Otterville, December 29, 1861.

Colonel DEITZLER, Commanding First Kansas:

You will repair from this place by the most direct route to Lexington and thence by the road which most nearly follows the river to Independence and Kansas City. You will break up all secession camps {p.241} you may hear of, disarm all persons who cannot give undoubted proof of loyalty and arrest and take to Kansas City all persons who have been concerned in aiding the enemy. You will take such steps as are necessary to bring to punishment all persons along your route who have violated the peace or have in any way contributed to the support or countenance of Price’s army. When you reach Kansas City you will report to Major-General Hunter, commanding Department of Kansas. Please hand the inclosed letter to the commanding officer of any portion of the forces named in it.

Respectfully, sir, your obedient servant,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

[Inclosure.]

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Otterville, December 29, 1861.

To the officers commanding detachments of Eighth Iowa, Seventh Missouri, light artillery, and cavalry belonging to forces in this department:

Immediately upon receipt of this order you will concentrate your forces at Kansas City where the senior officer present will assume the command. He will then proceed to Sedalia by way of Pleasant Hill and Warrensburg breaking up and dispersing all camps of rebels and armed squads, disarming every person who cannot give undoubted proof of loyalty and arresting and bringing to Sedalia all persons concerned in any way in having given aid, assistance or countenance to Price’s army.

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 30, 1861.

W. F. SWITZLER, Esq., Columbia, Mo.

SIR: Your letter of the 26th is just received. Most of your suggestions have already been carried out and I think that by this time the insurgents in Boone and adjacent counties are pretty well cleaned out. My orders of the 22d instant* will sufficiently indicate the policy I intend to pursue against these incendiaries. I hope all Union men will assist the military in bringing them to justice. I intend to make the secessionists repair this damage with their own hands and property. All I want is proof that they have aided, abetted or countenanced the operations of these rebels and they will be made to pay dearly for their whistle. Troops are moving in various directions to break up all these insurgent bands. They need hope no assistance from Price’s army. It is already in full retreat hotly pursued by our cavalry. If we reach him he will be cut up and defeated. If we can’t reach him he must fly from the State. His day in Missouri is passed. Until his army is broken up or driven into Arkansas I cannot spare troops to permanently station them in the different counties. All that I can possibly do in reference to that subject will be done.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* General Orders, No. 32, p. 237.

{p.242}

–––

LANCASTER, OHIO, December 30, 1861.

Major-General HALLECK.

SIR: I am pleased with the example which you have set on the North Missouri Railroad. The prompt execution of the scoundrels will do much good, but the destruction of the Little Platte River bridge and the promiscuous massacre of the railroad passengers-men, women and children-ought not to be lost sight of and buried up among or rather under recent enormities. A sufficient military force with a few of the best police detectives to be procured in our large cities might bring to justice some twenty or thirty of those murderers, and it would do more good to detect and hang them than to win a battle. These marauding bands are now the great mischief to Missouri.

I am, very respectfully, yours,

T. EWING.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 31, 1861.

Brigadier-General POPE, Otterville.

GENERAL: I send herewith the proceedings of a military commission ordered by Colonel Deitzler, First Kansas Regiment, for the trial of certain prisoners at Tipton, Mo., within the limits of your command.

In the first place a military commission can be ordered only by the General-in-Chief of the Army or by a general commanding a department, consequently all the proceedings of the commission ordered by Colonel Deitzler are null and void. The prisoners are therefore in precisely the same position as if no trial had taken place.

In the second place military commissions should as a general rule be resorted to only for cases which cannot be tried by a court-martial or by a proper civil tribunal. They are in other words tribunals of necessity, organized for the investigation and punishment of offenses which would otherwise go unpunished. Their proceedings should be regulated by the rules governing courts-martial so far as they may be applicable and the evidence should in all cases be fully recorded.

Prisoners of war, properly so called-that is men duly enrolled and commissioned in the service of an acknowledged enemy-are so far as the military authorities are concerned to be treated in the manner prescribed by the usages and customs of war. They are entitled to the rights of war but this fact does not exempt them from punishment by the civil tribunals for treason to the Government. But treason is an offense technically defined by the Constitution and is not triable by a military commission; nor will such tribunal try or punish a soldier duly enrolled and mustered into the enemy’s service by proper authority for taking life in battle or according to the rules of modern warfare. But it is a well-established principle that insurgents and marauding, predatory and guerrilla bands are not entitled to this exemption. Such men are by the laws of war regarded as no more nor less than murderers, robbers and thieves. The military garb and name cannot change the character of their offenses nor exempt them from punishment. Moreover if a prisoner of war has committed acts in violation of the laws of war such as murder, robbery, arson, &c., the fact of his being a prisoner-of war does not exempt him from trial and punishment by a military commission. In such cases the charge should be “violation of the laws of war,” and not violation of the “Rules and Articles of War,” which are statutory provisions modifying the laws of {p.243} war only in the particular cases to which these provisions apply. In all cases not embraced in this statutory law and not made triable by the courts which it creates we must recur to the general code of war and try by a military commission.

A military commission will be immediately ordered to assemble at La Mine cantonment for the trial of such prisoners as may be brought before it. You will furnish the judge-advocate with a copy of this letter for his guidance and will see that the charges and specifications are properly drawn up.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 31, 1861.

Brigadier-General SCHOFIELD, Commanding, &c.

GENERAL: I inclose a memorandum of information* received here respecting the principal persons who originated or encouraged the arsons committed on the North Missouri Railroad, and also a communication from Mr. Clay Taylor,* who you will observe is one of the parties accused although he was not aware of that fact when he wrote. It is believed here that there is pretty good foundation for these charges. I wish you to get all the information on this subject you can and if you deem the evidence sufficient to justify it to arrest the parties. Do not let the contents of the memorandum be made public.

If General Prentiss has taken the command of your forces you will of course report this letter to him. I also wish the matter of Mr. Clay Taylor’s complaint to be investigated and if injustice has been done him it must be repaired. I have had no information from you or General Prentiss for several days. Why is this?

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Not found.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, December 31, 1861.

Maj. Gen. HENRY W. HALLECK.

DEAR SIR: Although not acquainted with you personally and therefore claiming no right to obtrude myself upon your attention yet as a citizen of Missouri sworn to support the Constitution of the United States and of this State and under legal obligation not only to sustain all lawful authority but also morally bound to do all that in my power lies to restrain authority within legal bounds, that all things may be done lawfully and in order so that the dread majesty of the law may be asserted as the supreme power in this land which all must obey, I cannot refrain from doing what in my power lies to support the Government and to keep to the path of duty. For this purpose I have labored for months past through the public press in addresses to my fellow citizens, &c., constantly endeavoring to induce all to take and maintain the ground that in all things the law is our only master, and that all wrongs, civil and political, must be remedied by and through the methods the law points out. Usurpation of power is no excuse for revolution against those whose right to office is of limited duration, nor is lynch law the proper remedy for crime.

{p.244}

Having lived in this State for more than twenty years and being familiar with the opinions of its people, and understanding what have been their feelings, I desire to secure as charitable a judgment as possible of the conduct of those of my fellow citizens, who, driven by what they consider as outrages upon the liberties of the people and the authority of the State, have taken up arms against the United States. Also had there been more charity in judgment among the people of the different sections of this country secession, rebellion and civil war would never have reared their horrid fronts in what was once the land of law.

It is to ask this charity in judgment-that sympathy which a father should feel while compelled to punish a disobedient son that law and order may prevail in his family-that I address you this letter. Permit me to make a few suggestions which I think capable of proof before any court of justice in which law is the rule of judgment, or to any fair-minded man.

Secession has never been one of the political heresies of this State. Its legality has always been denied by the Democracy; it was always considered rank heresy by the old Whig party and by its successor, the Bell and Everett party, and the Breckinridge wing of the Democracy in the canvass of last year always denied that they held to the doctrine. The Presidential canvass of 1860 showed this to be the state of parties: Lincoln, 17,028, confined almost entirely to Saint Louis Gasconade and Cole and one or two other counties-chiefly a German vote; Bell, 58,372; Breckinridge, 31,319; Douglas, 58,801; total, 165,518. One of the main arguments used against the Breckinridge party in the discussions was that the breaking of the party tended to a dissolution of the Union. We did not think how near to the abyss we were standing.

During the session of the legislature finding what was its temper I was anxious in urging my friends to support the call for a convention so as to take the question of secession out of the hands of the general assembly and to submit the question of our federal relations directly to the people. The action of a large meeting of citizens in Saint Louis with which I had much to do induced many who were wavering in the assembly to vote for a call of a convention. The convention was called and to the surprise of the secessionists in the assembly with Vest and Claib Jackson at their head there was a Union majority of more than 80,000-nearly three to one.

Such was the condition of affairs at the time of Mr. Lincoln’s accession; such would have remained the condition of affairs had prudent, cautious means been used to lead the people of this State rather than to drive them. But unfortunately those who had the ear of the President were men whose sympathies were not in accord with those of the people, who had their own ends to subserve, who were reckless in assertion but positive in affirmation, and they were allowed to control things in Missouri as they saw fit. The opinions of the President and of the people of the Northern States were poisoned by those whose temper forbade their perceiving the real truth of things and whose passions prevented their granting any charity to a political adversary. No voices were allowed to be heard save the voices of those who were morally traitors to their State as banding with a political party whose spirit was directly hostile to its institutions. Force was made master by those who were ignorant that law only has lawful authority, and instead of using the marshal’s writ they took the soldier’s sword and the consequences have been terrible.

{p.245}

I say to you to-day, you who have been a lawyer and have studied the principles of Anglo-Saxon, I dare not say American freedom, that the United States marshal with his warrant could have led all the forces in Camp Jackson before a commissioner, a judge of the United States, for examination and commitment if they had committed any offense against the laws of the United States, or to be placed under bonds to keep the peace of the Union. But no, that would not subserve the purposes of those to whom was secretly entrusted the management of affairs in Missouri. The people who were suspected of being disloyal were to be terrified into abject submission. A bad way of dealing with Americans. Remember that the President had not declared Missouri in insurrection nor commanded any insurgents to disperse. And yet militia assembled for instruction in accordance with an old law and with the Constitution and laws of Congress were taken prisoners of war when they had levied no war, and women and children fell a sacrifice.

I grant that Governor Jackson meant mischief. He was powerless; he was watched by those who knew that as soon as he reached a certain point the marshal’s warrant would be laid upon him and his schemes, opposed as they were to the expressed will of the people would have been crushed. General Harney was appointed. The reign of law was restored. Harney was removed and the governor, terrified by the past, called for 50,000 men and inaugurated civil war. No; he did not inaugurate it-he accepted an issue forced upon him and declared that he was only sustaining the dignity of the State. Now permit me to say that with the great mass of the insurgents that is the sole feeling that has actuated them. I know that it was so with Price, and I think that within up to three weeks past that Price and his army would have laid down their arms upon having full assurance that the civil laws should be restored to authority and that no punishment should be inflicted for what they had done. Many of the demagogues desired to enter the Southern Confederacy but the masses were content with the Union.

I am of opinion still that terms could be made with Price which would disband his army and restore peace partially though not entirely, for marauders whose object was plunder would continue their work for some time before the reign of law could be restored. The principal feeling in the interior is against the Dutch or rather it was so in October when I was along the lines of railroads and in that section between Cole and Cooper Counties. I fear that it has gone much further now. The main strength of the insurgents has been that they could point to the action of Federal troops and officers and say that it was unconstitutional and illegal and even contrary to the rules and regulations. Men with arms in their hands violating all law could not be heard urging such reasons for their conduct. But many quiet, good citizens who saw these things could not sanction them and could not defend them and this weakened the Government. It requires either a very wise or a forgiving spirit to overlook the wrongs of those in official position and to have the patience to use only means of legal redress and to follow up offenders until redress is obtained. But that spirit has made English freedom what it is and that spirit only can preserve our American liberty. My greatest sorrow has been that I have seen so little of that spirit displayed by our people in this State and through the country.

You have studied military law but have approached it from the military side. I have studied it but have viewed it from the standpoint {p.246} of the Constitution and our civil law. With our Constitution all military law is the creature of the Constitution and of the laws of Congress. The Constitution, through its restraints and limitations upon the law of nations, so far as the rights of American citizens are concerned, and the citizen at home or with the army on foreign soil, can still claim that he may not be deprived of life, liberty or property but by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land. This feeling is very strong in the hearts of our citizens and the violations of these rights rankle deeply. Illegal exercise of authority is most grossly impolitic unless men are becoming despotic and seeking selfishly possession of power for themselves. A coup d’état makes an emperor but not a free people.

I shall not consume your time in discussing this question but refer you as a lawyer to two cases decided by the Supreme Court where the principles are laid down. In the case of Harmony against Lieut. Col. D. D. Mitchell, under Doniphan’s command in New Mexico, who seized the plaintiff’s property, reported in 13 Howard, U. S. Rep., 113, 134, the court declared as the English courts had done that the military position of the officer in “a foreign country could not enlarge his power over the property of the citizen nor give him any authority in that respect which he would not possess at home. And when the owner has done nothing to forfeit his rights every public officer is bound to respect them whether he finds the property in a foreign or hostile country or his own.”

That is very old law. Let me also refer you to the opinion of Justice Woodbury in the case of Luther vs. Borden in 7 Howard, R. 45, on the question of the legality of martial law.

I have already written much more than I intended, and shall not as a preacher would do make any practical application of the principles I have stated. When the bands of society are dissolved, when courts cease to operate and their process is set at naught I admit that the necessity of the case requires that the military authority should preserve the peace, using as much power as may be needed for that purpose and no more. Through the interior of this State no authority can now preserve the peace but the military, but it finds great difficulty in learning who are the parties guilty of burning bridges, tearing up railroads, &c.

Let me make a suggestion which I made to Governor Gamble last summer, in order to discover these men and to learn how to deal with them. At the county seat in the clerk’s office will be found the poll books of the election in February last for the convention, and the assessor’s book for 1860. These poll books will give the names of the voters by townships and precincts; the assessments will give the names of those owning property, and through Union citizens and others the whereabouts of every man can soon be learned and a black list made of those who have been out. If a U. S. commissioner is present all such parties can be legally arrested for trial or put under bonds for the future when brought before a judge of the U. S. courts. The details of the plan I need not work out; it can be attended to through your provost-marshal.

I have written this letter simply with the desire of doing good. If I succeed I am sufficiently rewarded. If I fail I have only consumed your time, for which I make my apology.

Respectfully, yours,

CHAS. C. WHITTELSEY.

{p.247}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 1, 1862.

Hon. T. EWING, Lancaster, Ohio.

SIR: I thank you for your letter of the 30th ultimo. I am satisfied that nothing but the severest punishment can prevent the burning of railroad bridges and the great destruction of human life. I shall punish all I can catch although I have no doubt there will be a newspaper howl against me as a bloodthirsty monster. These incendiaries have destroyed in the last ten days $150,000 worth of railroad property notwithstanding that there are more than 10,000 troops kept guarding the railroads in this State. A plot was discovered on the 20th ultimo to burn all the bridges in the State and at the same time to fire this city. Fortunately a part of the intended mischief was prevented. This is not usually done by armed and open enemies but by pretended quiet citizens living on their farms. A bridge or building is set on fire and the culprit an hour after is quietly plowing or working in his field. The civil courts can give us no assistance as they are very generally unreliable. There is no alternative but to enforce martial law. Our army here is almost as much in a hostile country as it was when in Mexico.

I have determined to put down these insurgents and bridge-burners with a strong hand. It must be done; there is no other remedy. If I am sustained by the Government and country well and good; if not I will take the consequences.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

MARTINSBURG, January 1, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK:

I have thoroughly scoured the whole country as far west as the field of Prentiss’ fight. Have captured about fifty prisoners, among the rest Captain Owen, the leader of the bridge-burners about High Hill, and Col. Jeff. Jones. Colonels Todd and Morton are now coming in toward Danville and Wellsville. Most of the bridge-burners not killed or captured have passed back across the railroad. I am disposing my troops so as to protect the road and clean the country northwest of it. If it is deemed necessary to keep me in this command I would like to return to Saint Louis for a day or two.

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 1.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 1, 1862.

I. In carrying on war in a portion of country occupied or threatened to be attacked by an enemy, whether within or without the territory of the United States, crimes and military offenses are frequently committed which are not triable or punishable by courts-martial and which are not within the jurisdiction of any existing civil court. Such cases, however, must be investigated and the guilty parties punished. The good of society and the safety of the army imperiously demand this. They must therefore be taken cognizance of by the military power, but except in cases of extreme urgency a military commander should not himself attempt to decide upon the guilt or innocence of {p.248} individuals. On the contrary it is the usage and custom of war among all civilized nations to refer such cases to a duly constituted military tribunal composed of reliable officers, who acting under the solemnity of an oath and the responsibility always attached to a court of record will examine witnesses, determine the guilt or innocence of parties accused-and fix the punishment. This is usually done by courts-martial; but in our country these courts have a very limited jurisdiction both in regard to persons and offenses. Many classes of persons cannot be arraigned before such courts for any offense whatsoever, and many crimes committed even by military officers, enlisted men or camp retainers cannot be tried under the “Rules and Articles of War.” Military commissions must be resorted to for such cases and these commissions should be ordered by the same authority, be constituted in a similar manner and their proceedings be conducted according to the same general rules as courts-martial in order to prevent abuses which might otherwise arise.

II. As much misapprehension has arisen in this department in relation to this subject the following rules are published for the information of all concerned:

First. Military commissions can be ordered only by the General-in-Chief of the Army or by the commanding officer of the department, and the proceedings must be sent to headquarters for revision.

Second. They will be composed of not less than three members, one of whom will act as judge-advocate and recorder where no officer is designated for that duty. A larger number will be detailed where the public service will permit.

Third. All the proceedings will be recorded and signed by the President and judge-advocate and recorder as in the case of courts-martial. These proceedings will be governed by the same rules as courts-martial so far as they may be applicable.

Fourth. Civil offenses cognizable by civil courts whenever such loyal courts exist will not be tried by a military commission. It should therefore be stated in every application for a commission whether or not there is any loyal civil court to which the civil offenses charged can be referred for trial. It must be observed, however, that many offenses which in time of peace are civil offenses become in time of war military offenses and are to be tried by a military tribunal even in places where civil tribunals exist.

Fifth. No case which by the Rules and Articles of War is triable by a court-martial will be tried by a military commission. Charges therefore preferred against prisoners before a military commission should be “violation of the laws of war,” and never “violation of the Rules and Articles of War,” which are statutory provisions defining and modifying the general laws of war in particular cases and in regard to particular persons and offenses. They do not apply to cases not embraced in the statute; but all cases so embraced must be tried by a court-martial. In other cases we must be governed by the general code of war.

Sixth. Treason as a distinct offense is defined by the Constitution and must be tried by courts duly constituted by law; but certain acts of a treasonable character such as conveying information to the enemy, acting as spies, &c., are military offenses triable by military tribunals and punishable by military authority.

Seventh. The fact that those persons who are now carrying on hostilities against the lawful authorities of the United States are rebels and traitors to the Government does not deprive them of any of the {p.249} rights of war so far as the military authorities are concerned. In our intercourse with the duly authorized forces of the so-called “Confederate States” and in the treatment of prisoners of war taken from such forces we must be governed by the usages and customs of war in like cases. But the rights so given to such prisoners by the laws of war do not according to the same code exempt them from trial and punishment by the proper courts for treason or other offenses against the Government. The rights which they may very properly claim as belligerents under the general rules of belligerent intercourse-commercia belli-cannot exempt them from the punishment to which they may have subjected themselves as citizens under the general laws of the land.

Eighth. Again a soldier duly enrolled and authorized to act in a military capacity in the enemy’s service is not according to the code military individually responsible for the taking of human life in battle, siege, &c., while at the same time he is held individually responsible for any act which he may commit in violation of the laws of war. Thus he cannot be punished by a military tribunal for committing acts of hostility which are authorized by the laws of war but if he has committed murder, robbery, theft, arson, &c., the fact of his being a prisoner of war does not exempt him from trial by a military tribunal.

Ninth. And again while the code of war gives certain exemptions to a soldier regularly in the military service of an enemy it is a well-established principle that insurgents not militarily organized under the laws of the State, predatory partisans and guerrilla bands are not entitled to such exemptions; such men are not legitimately in arms and the military name and garb which they have assumed cannot give a military exemption to the crimes which they may commit. They are in a legal sense mere freebooters and banditti and are liable to the same punishment which was imposed upon guerrilla bands by Napoleon in Spain, and by Scott in Mexico.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

JNO. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

ST. LOUIS, January 2, 1862.

CHARLES C. WHITTELSEY, Esq., Saint Louis, Mo.

SIR: Your letter of the 31st has been received and its contents noted. You are entirely mistaken in relation to the animus of General Price. The fairest offers have been made to him but he scouts them and says he will fight the Federal Government to the bitter end. The time for conciliation I am sorry to say has passed. Nothing but the military power can now put down the rebellion and save Union men in this State. It is useless now to try any other remedy. Your suggestions about detecting railroad bridge-burners will receive due consideration and be acted on where circumstances will permit.

Very respectfully, &c.,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

WELLSVILLE, MO., January 2, 1862.

Col. J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General, Saint Louis, Mo.

COLONEL: I have the honor to urgently request the immediate action of the commanding general upon a matter which I regard of vital {p.250} importance. Upon my arrival at Warrenton I found a battalion of Reserve Corps Cavalry under command of Major Hollan the only cavalry at my disposal. These men had preceded me only a few days hut they had already murdered one of the best Union men in that vicinity and committed numerous depredations upon the property of peaceful citizens. Since that time their conduct has been absolutely barbarous-a burning disgrace to the Army and the Union cause. In spite of all my efforts to the contrary they have plundered and destroyed the property of citizens, many of them the best Union men in the State, to the amount of many thousands of dollars. Their officers either connive at it or else have no power to restrain their men. I cannot trust them out of my sight for a moment and of course they are of no use to me as cavalry so long as this is the case. I have succeeded in detecting five of the robbers and have them in irons, and have arrested the major and one of the captains and placed them in close confinement.

I have placed Lieutenant Sheldon, of my staff, in command of the two companies at this post, but I cannot long spare him from his proper duties and there are still three companies at other posts and it is beyond my power to prevent their acts of robbery if I make any use of them. No doubt there are some good men in this battalion but as a class they are well-armed and well-mounted barbarians. I am told there is at Benton Barracks a considerable force of good mounted men without arms. I therefore urgently request that a battalion of them be sent without arms or horses and that I be authorized to dismount and disarm Major Hollan’s battalion and send it to Saint Louis. If something of this kind be not done soon there will be very few Union men in this part of the State. I will as soon as possible forward charges against Major Hollan, Captain Wenkel and the men I have arrested.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 3, 1862.

Brigadier-General SCHOFIELD, Wellsville, Mo.

GENERAL: Your letter of yesterday is just received. I have no cavalry to send in place of Hollan’s command. As soon as you can dispense with this command send it back to Benton Barracks. If you think the officers and men who are in arrest had better be tried there I will order a military commission immediately on your sending the names of five officers suitable for such a court and one for recorder. If you think that they can better be tried here send all the prisoners and witnesses to this city where there is now a commission in session; but don’t send them at the same time with the command. They will require a different escort. The offenses of each should be stated fully so that charges and specifications may be drawn up here. If their crimes are proved they will not be likely to escape punishment. Having all the witnesses there I think a military commission might dispatch the cases in a few days.

I send you a couple of memoranda which may help you in finding out some of the bridge-burners. The names of the writers are known to me and are represented as reliable men.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major. General.

{p.251}

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 4, 1862.

Brigadier-General SCHOFIELD, Wellsville, Mo.

GENERAL: It has been represented to me by Union men who live along the North Missouri Railroad that the best way to ascertain who are the bridge-burners would be to appoint a military commission to sit at Wellsville or Mexico who might try parties accused and compel witnesses to attend and give their testimony.

For example it is said that one Wells, who lives at Mexico and is a rank secessionist-although he pretends to be a Union man-has two sons in Price’s army, or had-knows all about who are the bridge-burners in that part of the country and will give evidence if compelled to. Other names have also been given. If you think well of this and suggest the names of officers for such a commission I will order it. I can send one officer from here to act if necessary.

It is all-important that these culprits be brought to justice and I hope you will not leave until you accomplish it. Those condemned can be brought here for punishment. Perhaps it would not be safe to execute any one there.

Yours, truly,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

LANCASTER, OHIO, January 5, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Saint Louis, Mo.

DEAR SIR: The ground on which you can treat these railroad destroyers as military criminals is that they are within your lines in the guise of peaceful citizens, destroying life and property, and therefore as secret enemies caught in the warlike act amenable to martial law. The secessionists cannot except to it for in Tennessee they hang all the bridge-burners they can catch, and in this case you very truly say severity is mercy.

However, all you want is to protect life and property and perhaps the best way to do it is this: Try by a court-martial all that you have caught; hang at once two or three of the ringleaders in the presence of their fellows; sentence a dozen or twenty or even fifty of the most culpable and reprieve them for a time with the distinct understanding that they will be hanged according to sentence if further depredations are committed by their associates but that they may hope for mercy if there is order and peace. Discharge the least culpable and let them go home and carry the conditions with them with the assurance that if they themselves are caught again they will find no mercy. And in holding as hostages care should be taken to hold from each neighborhood, family and clique one or more.

The scoundrels engaged at the Little Platte deserve more severe handling than those you have caught for they deliberately planned and committed the most cruel, indiscriminate murder of men, women and children.

I am, very respectfully, yours,

T. EWING.

{p.252}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 6, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK.

GENERAL: The man you mention calling himself colonel in the State militia has authority to raise a regiment. You have seen the general order prohibiting all intermeddling with home guards and reserve corps. I will send him a copy of that order and of your note and if he continues to excite disaffection in either body in the U. S. service shoot him by all means as he will deserve it as well at my hands as at yours. I would like very much to see the shooting process begin and will undertake to provide you with suitable subjects (beginning with Jennison) until the service is purged from men who disgrace humanity and ruin the cause of our Government.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. R. GAMBLE.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 7, 1862.

H. R. GAMBLE, Governor of Missouri.

MY DEAR GOVERNOR: I hardly know what to do with the class of persons to whom you allude in your note which is just received. Reliable gentlemen in the interior write that nearly every one of this class when released and allowed to return to their homes secretly assist in stirring up rebellion, bridge-burning, &c., and are continually sending information to Price of the state of affairs within our lines. Indeed I believe many of them pretend to give themselves up for that very purpose and are nothing more or less than spies. Of course there are some honorable exceptions. I speak only of the mass. It seems to be too hard to arrest and confine all and yet it is difficult to make distinctions except in cases where their loyalty is fully vouched by reliable Union men.

The only feasible plan suggested is to require a stringent oath and parole of honor of all persons released with the full understanding that they would incur the penalty of death by violating it. If they refuse to take this hold them as prisoners of war subject to exchange as such if an exchange should be authorized. It is proposed moreover to permit no one to take this oath and receive his release unless we have very satisfactory assurances that he will keep it. If after voluntarily taking it he shall violate it then impose the penalty with rigor. A few examples would probably put a stop to its violation.

If however you can propose anything better I shall be most happy to receive your suggestions.

I inclose a copy of the proposed oath and parole.* Very respectfully, &c.,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Not found.

–––

WELLSVILLE, MO., January 8, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK, Commanding Department of the Missouri, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: I find here your order* appointing a military commission in accordance with my suggestion and also your letter of the 3d {p.253} instant in which you mention five officers and a recorder as the proper number to constitute a commission. As some of the cases to be tried are very important ones it seems to me that the number of members should not be less than five. Since leaving Saint Louis I have taken pains to learn the names of officers most suitable for such a court which I inclose and will take the responsibility of withholding the order already issued till I can hear from you.

...

We are progressing finely in ferreting out and arresting the bridge-burners. Colonel Morton caught twenty-nine of them west of Montgomery Monday night, and has obtained much valuable evidence against leading and influential parties some of whom are already in hands. Some arrests have been made and much evidence obtained at other points on the road. I think we will have no need of the commission as a means of obtaining evidence but will probably have some important cases ready for trial by the time the soldiers are disposed of.

...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

* Omitted. Refers to Special Orders, No. 17, revoked in Special Orders, No. 28, of January 10, 1862, for which see p. 254.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 9, 1862.

Maj. Gen. GEORGE B. MCCLELLAN, Washington.

GENERAL: Yours of the 3d was received last evening* and has received my most careful consideration. ... The insurrection in the northeast is not yet entirely suppressed. General Henderson had an engagement yesterday near Mexico and captured forty prisoners. He expected another fight this morning. If any of our troops are withdrawn from there at present the scattered insurgents will collect and again destroy the railroad and telegraph line. We may expect, however, that most of these gangs will be broken up in the course of the next two or three weeks.

...

If the troops at Sedalia and Rolla are not either sent against Price or put in position to keep him in check he will unquestionably return to the Missouri River where he will be received by a very large mass of insurgents who have concealed arms and ammunition. This information comes from so many reliable sources that I cannot doubt its correctness. The question is therefore a very plain one. If a sufficient number of troops are to be withdrawn from Missouri at the present time to constitute an expedition up the Cumberland strong enough to afford any reasonable hope of resisting an attack of the enemy we must seriously peril the loss of this State. ...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Omitted.

{p.254}

–––

MEXICO, January 9, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK:

I have about forty rebel prisoners (some for bridge-burning), ten captured in battle yesterday. More will be captured to-day. Shall I send them to Saint Louis or will you send a commission to try them here? Please answer by telegraph.

J. B. HENDERSON, Brigadier-General.

–––

MEXICO, MO., January 10, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: It is represented to me by many of the most respectable citizens of this part of the State who have as they confess sympathized with the rebellion but have I think unquestionably been opposed to all such acts as bridge-burning, &c., that they now desire to pledge themselves in the most solemn manner that they will hereafter discharge to the fullest extent their duty as loyal citizens by discouraging all rebellious organizations and by giving information to the U. S. authorities of every movement of the kind that shall come to their knowledge provided they can be secured in their persons and property from molestation by U. S. troops. It appears to me that by exercising a wise discretion in granting such assurances of protection to men of well known respectability and influence much good may be done. If you approve of this proposition I will carry it out in such cases as I am perfectly satisfied are worthy of it.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 28.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 10, 1862.

I. The order for the military commission to meet at Wellsville by Special Orders, No. 17, on January 8, 1862, current series, from these headquarters, is hereby revoked and the following detail substituted to meet on Monday, the 13th instant at 10 a.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable for the trial of such persons as may be brought before it.

Detail for the commission: 1, Lieut. Col. Samuel A. Holmes, Tenth Missouri Volunteers; 2, Capt. Richard Y. Lanius, Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers; 3, Capt. A. C. Todd, Tenth Missouri Volunteers; 4, Surg. John O. Edwards, Third Iowa; 5, Capt. Martin Armstrong, Eighty-first Ohio, who will act as judge-advocate and recorder. The commission will sit without regard to hours.

...

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 10.}

HDQRS. NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Mexico, January 10, 1862.

It being represented by C. M. Johnson, captain of a company of rebel troops organized in Saint Charles County, and defeated by the U. S. forces under General Prentiss near Mount Zion Church in Boone County, on the 28th of December, 1861, that the members of said {p.255} company are now desirous to lay down their arms and surrender themselves as prisoners of war it is hereby directed that all of said company who shall so voluntarily surrender themselves to an officer of the U. S. army and deliver to him their arms shall be received and treated as prisoners of war, provided that if it shall hereafter appear that any of such men have committed any acts in violation of the laws of war such as burning of bridges and destruction of railroads those guilty of such acts shall be liable to all penalties prescribed by the laws of war.

By order of Brigadier-General Schofield:

H. HESCOCK, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CAIRO, Cairo, January 11, 1862.

Brig. Gen. E. A. PAINE, Commanding Bird’s Point, Mo.:

I understand that four of our pickets were shot this morning. If this is so and appearances indicate that the assassins were citizens not regularly organized in the rebel army the whole country should be cleared out for six miles around and word given that all citizens making their appearance within those limits are liable to be shot.

To execute this patrols should be sent out in all directions and bring into camp at Bird’s Point all citizens, together with their subsistence, and require them to remain under pain of death and destruction of their property until properly relieved. Let no harm befall these people if they quietly submit but bring them in and place them in camp below the breast-works and have them properly guarded.

The intention is not to make political prisoners of these people but to cut off a dangerous class of spies. This applies to all classes and conditions, age and sex. If, however, women and children prefer other protection than we afford them they may be allowed to retire beyond the limits indicated not to return until authorized.

Report to me as soon as possible every important occurrence within your command.

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE-GUARD, Camp at Springfield, January 12, 1862.*

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Commanding U. S. Forces in the Western Department.

GENERAL: I have received information that as major-general commanding in this department you have either ordered or allowed the arrest of citizens in the pursuit of their usual and peaceful avocations; that men-officers and privates-belonging to this army have been taken prisoners on the Kansas border and conveyed to Fort Leavenworth, and as such and for no other established offense or crime have been shot.

In some cases I have learned that my discharged soldiers have been seized whenever and wherever they have shown themselves and that they have been by military coercion forced into a servitude unknown to international and civilized usages in such cases.

{p.256}

I have obtained information that individuals and parties of men specially appointed and instructed by me to destroy railroads, culverts and bridges by tearing them up, burning, &c., have been arrested and subjected to a general court-martial for alleged crimes which all the laws of warfare heretofore recognized by the civilized world have regarded as distinctly lawful and proper. I have learned that such persons when tried, if convicted of the offense or offenses as stated, are viewed as lawful subjects for capital punishment.

These statements brought to me in various ways I cannot believe to be correct. It is upon this subject that I now propose to address you. It is necessary that we understand each other and have some guiding knowledge of that character of warfare which is to be waged by our respective governments. This understanding should be given at once. It is desirable both by you and me. Both armies desire it and the exigencies of the war demand that some certain rules should be the basis of our conduct and control. Delay is fatal. It cannot be allowed. We must understand each other.

Do you intend to continue the arrest of citizens engaged in their ordinary peaceful pursuits and treat them as traitors and rebels; if so will you make exchanges with me for such as I may or will make for similar causes? Do you intend to regard members of this army as persons deserving death whenever and wherever they may be captured or will you extend the recognized rights of prisoners of war by the code of the civilized world? Do you regard-and state as such the law, governing your army-the destruction of important roads, transportation facilities, &c., for military purposes as the legal right of a belligerent power? Do you intend to regard men whom I have specially dispatched to destroy roads, burn bridges, tear up culverts, &c., as amenable to an enemy’s court-martial or will you have them to be tried as usual by the proper authorities according to the statutes of the State?

It is vastly important to the interests of all parties concerned that these momentous issues should be determined. No man deplores the horrors of war more than I do; no one will sacrifice more to avert its desolating march. Each party must be heard. Each must have a kind of common protection. I am willing to afford this. It remains with you to decide the question with that frankness which attends your official communications. I await your reply.

I am, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

STERLING PRICE, Major-General, Commanding Missouri State Guard.

* See Halleck to Price, p 258.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CAIRO, Cairo, January 12, 1862.

General E. A. PAINE, Commanding Second Brigade, Bird’s Point, Mo.:

The citizens brought in under directions of yesterday may be put in tents as suggested by you. They can use the tents of troops who do not go out with you or such surplus tents as may be in the hands of troops at Bird’s Point. If you have reason to believe that the parties guilty of shooting our pickets are discovered inform me and I will order a court or commission that will act without delay.

U. S. GRANT, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

{p.257}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, January 14, 1862.

Maj. Gen. GEORGE B. MCCLELLAN, General-in-Chief of the Army, Washington.

GENERAL: Advices received from scouts and spies who have been in the enemy’s camps lead to the belief that Price’s pretended retreat was a ruse intended to deceive us. He fell back rapidly from Osceola to Springfield giving out the report that he was intending to retire to winter quarters in Arkansas. It was expected that on receiving information of this retreat we would withdraw the mass of our forces at Rolla and Sedalia for operations against Columbus. As soon as this had been done Price was to return with re-enforcements from Arkansas and march rapidly to Lexington and Jefferson City. In the meantime his emissaries were to destroy all railroad bridges and telegraph lines so as to prevent our sending troops against him. This city was at the same time to be set on fire at different places and a general insurrection was to break out here and in all the northern counties of this State. The time of the burning of the bridges was determined by private signals of which we have discovered thousands scattered through the country. Fortunately I was warned in time to protect this city and the principal bridges. Much damage, however, has been done at places where it was least expected, as near Quincy, Palmyra, Hudson, Mexico, &c., almost under the noses of our troops. At other places my telegrams were received in time to save the bridges. Evidences of this plan of the enemy have been received from so many sources as to leave very little doubt of its correctness.

The arrangements made to break up the bands of bridge-burners in the northeastern counties of the State have been very successful. Immediately after the burning had commenced a small force of cavalry started in the cars from Hudson City. In this way they surprised a large party of secessionists, killed 8, took a number of prisoners, horses, &c. On the 28th ultimo General Prentiss with 240 of Colonel Glover’s cavalry and 200 of Colonel Birge’s sharpshooters attacked a body of rebels under Colonel Dorsey about 900 strong at Mount Zion, Boone County, and dispersed them. Enemy’s loss reported 150 killed and wounded, 35 prisoners, 95 horses, and 105 guns captured. Our loss 3 killed and 11 wounded. This disparity resulted from the long range of the rifles of our sharpshooters.

Several other skirmishes have taken place and some 200 prisoners taken, Brigadier-General Schofield captured about 50 in the vicinity of Mexico. The enemy has scattered in every direction but as our troops are scouring the country thoroughly I think many of the bridge-burners will eventually be caught. Most of them are from Price’s army and have returned home under the pretense that they were Union men impressed into Price’s service. No reliance whatever can be placed upon these pretended refugees from military impressment.

...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

{p.258}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 14, 1862.

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General:

The superintendent of the Quincy and Palmyra Railroad declines to rebuild the bridges recently burned by the rebels. There are 600 tons of U. S. property at Quincy for transportation over this road. There are three plans proposed: First, that the United States rebuild these bridges, the Quartermaster’s Department paying expenses to be reimbursed from ordinary rates of transportation; second, that the United States take possession of the road making repairs and using it for Government purposes; third, that secessionists of Marion and Rolla Counties be made to repair damages or pay expenses of such repairs. I approve the third plan and will execute it if authorized by the War Department. An immediate answer requested. The public service requires a prompt decision of the question. I am ready to act.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General, Commanding.

–––

WARRENTON, January 18, 1862.

Brigadier-General PRENTISS, Palmyra, Mo.:

I am informed that by the removal of the U. S. troops the bridges on the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad are left unguarded. The six months’ State troops are to be mustered out on the 25th instant. Can you furnish troops enough to take care of the road or must I delay the mustering out? I will go to Hudson to-morrow. Where shall I find you?

J. M. SCHOFIELD.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, January 22, 1862.*

General STERLING PRICE, Commanding, &c.

GENERAL: ... You also complain that “individuals and parties of men specially appointed and instructed by you to destroy railroads, culverts and bridges by tearing them up, burning, &c., have been arrested and subjected to a general court-martial for alleged crimes.” This statement is in the main correct. Where “individuals and parties of men” violate the laws of war they will be tried and if found guilty will certainly be punished whether acting under your “special appointment and instructions” or not. You must be aware, general, that no orders of yours can save from punishment spies, marauders, robbers, incendiaries, guerrilla bands, &c., who violate the laws of war. You cannot give immunity to crime.

But let us fully understand each other on this point. If you send armed forces wearing the garb of soldiers and duly organized and enrolled as legitimate belligerents to destroy railroads, bridges, &c., as a military act we shall kill them if possible in open warfare, or if we capture them we shall treat them as prisoners of war. But it is well understood that you have sent numbers of your adherents in the garb of peaceful citizens and under false pretenses through our lines into Northern Missouri to rob and destroy the property of Union men and to burn and destroy railroad bridges thus endangering the lives of thousands, and this too without any military necessity or possible {p.259} military advantage. Moreover peaceful citizens of Missouri quietly working on their farms have been instigated by your emissaries to take up arms as insurgents and to rob and plunder and to commit arson and murder. They do not even act under the garb of soldiers but under false pretenses and in the guise of peaceful citizens.

You certainly will not pretend that men guilty of such crimes although “specially appointed and instructed” by you are entitled to the rights and immunities of ordinary prisoners of war. If you do will you refer me to a single authority on the laws of war which recognizes such a claim? You may rest assured, general, that all prisoners of war not guilty of crime will be treated with all proper consideration and kindness. With the exception of being properly confined they will be lodged and fed and where necessary clothed, the same as our own troops. I am sorry to say that our prisoners who have come from your camps do not report such treatment on your part. They say that you gave them no rations, no clothing, no blankets, but left them to perish with want and cold.

Moreover it is believed that you subsist your troops by robbing and plundering the non-combatant Union inhabitants of the southwestern counties of this State. Thousands of poor families have fled to us for protection and support. They say that your troops robbed them of their provisions and clothing, carrying away their shoes and bedding and even cutting cloth from their looms and that you have driven women and children from their homes to starve and perish in the cold. I have not retaliated such conduct upon your adherents here as I have no intention of waging such a barbarous warfare; but I shall whenever I can punish such crimes by whomsoever they may be committed.

I am daily expecting instructions respecting an exchange of prisoners of war. I will communicate with you on that subject as soon as they are received.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General, Commanding Department.

* See Price to Halleck p. 255.

–––

HEADQUARTERS NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Mexico, January 23, 1862.

Brig. Gen. BENJAMIN LOAN, Saint Joseph, Mo.:

General Prentiss desires that you station a guard at each one of the bridges from Saint Joseph to Grand River inclusive.

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, January 27, 1862.

Maj. W. M. STONE, Third Iowa Volunteers, Comdg. Post, Mexico, Mo.

MAJOR: The commanding general desires me to advise you in regard to Col. Jeff Jones, now held as a prisoner by you, that you will release him from confinement upon the following conditions, viz: He must give his bond in the sum of $10,000 that he will not leave the county of Callaway, Mo., without the written permission of Brigadier-General Schofield and that he will report in person at any military post in his {p.260} command immediately after a notice to do so shall have been left at his residence. Upon the execution of his bond as above you will give him a certificate of release and a safeguard forbidding any United States or State troops from molesting him or his family in person or property until the charges against him shall have been examined and disposed of.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

C. W. MARSH.

–––

HEADQUARTERS NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, Mo., January 27, [1862].

Capt. LEONIDAS HORNEY, Tenth Missouri Volunteers, Comdg. Post, High Hill, Mo.

CAPTAIN: The general directs me in reply to your communication of the 22d instant* to say that all prisoners against whom there is any evidence either of being engaged in or of aiding or abetting those who are engaged in the rebellion shall be kept and the evidence against them reduced to writing.

You will of course use the utmost diligence in ferreting out the bridge-burners and arrest if possible all who have been guilty of furnishing them with tools or arms. Your attention is particularly directed to the wealthy and influential secessionists in your vicinity against whom you may find evidence of complicity with the bridge-burners. In regard to wagons, &c., you must apply to your regimental quartermaster who should have drawn sufficient for the regiment. Supplies of provisions will be furnished in accordance with General Orders, No. 6.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

C. S. SHELDON, Lieutenant and Aide-de-Camp.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, Mo., January 30, 1862.

Captain BROADHEAD, Assistant Adjutant-General, Louisiana, Mo.:

As soon as you can conveniently do so I desire you to go to Mexico and take all the prisoners at that place against whom there is satisfactory evidence of bridge-burning and like crimes and the witnesses in their cases and carry them to Palmyra for trial. It may also be necessary for you to remain at Palmyra during the trial to assist in presenting the evidence. This you can determine by consulting with the judge-advocate of the commission. The commanding officer at Mexico will furnish you the necessary guard for the prisoners.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

–––

WASHINGTON, January 31, 1862.

Maj. Gen. HENRY W. HALLECK.

SIR: It occurs to me that it would be judicious if practicable to dispose of bridge-burners and other persons caught in citizens’ dress {p.261} within our lines and engaged in hostile operations in such garb as spies deserving death as such according to the laws of war. I fear it will be difficult to justify military executions for bridge-burning alone.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

BRITTON A. HILL.

P. S.-The mud is knee-deep and has been for two weeks and more. No advance can be made by the Army of the Potomac in this state of the roads. The enemy have doubtless transferred several of their crack regiments to Kentucky upon the presumption that no advance can be made here by us.

–––

MILITARY COMMISSION, Danville, January 31, 1862.

Brig. Gen. J. M. SCHOFIELD, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: The military commission has finished the cavalry cases and is now engaged upon the bridge-burners. The records, eight in number, in the first named will be forwarded to-day. We have commenced and partially finished three of the railroad cases and are proceeding as fast as possible. We have been somewhat delayed by reason of absence of witnesses and other causes but I think now that we will be able to dispose of the business at this point in a short time.

Very respectfully, &c.,

SAMUEL A. HOLMES, President of Commission.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Otterville, February 1, 1862.

Col. JOHN D. STEVENSON:

You will repair to Lexington, Mo., and take post at that place quartering your men in public buildings so far as practicable and taking such other buildings belonging to disloyal citizens as may be necessary for the remainder.

You are charged with preserving the peace in that section and maintaining the authority of the Government, and you will accordingly be guided in your action by the orders hitherto issued from the Department and these headquarters. All organizations against the peace of the State or the Government of the United States will be put down whether armed or unarmed, and all persons carrying on guerrilla warfare or giving aid to the enemy will be arrested and kept in confinement. Written charges against each with the testimony to substantiate them will be forwarded to the provost-marshal-general in Saint Louis who will issue the necessary order for their disposition.

All plunder and outrage committed upon the property or persons of peaceful citizens is a disgrace to the service and a serious injury to the discipline and efficiency of the troops concerned in it. You will therefore keep mounted patrols through the country in the vicinity of your post with orders to shoot down any soldiers engaged in depredating upon property or outraging peaceful citizens. This paragraph of your instructions you will publish to your command and have strictly executed.

...

I am, colonel, very respectfully,

JNO. POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

{p.262}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 3, 1862.

Col. J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General, Department of the Missouri.

COLONEL: I have directed Capt. Edward Harding, of the Missouri Militia, to superintend the building of block-houses at the Peruque and Salt River bridges on the North Missouri Railroad as recommended by Lieut. Col. J. B. McPherson in his report of January 12 to Brigadier-General Cullum. I respectfully request the major-general commanding to give me the authority required by paragraph 905, Army Regulations for 1861, to employ extra-duty men for this purpose.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

–––

COLUMBIA, MO., February 3, 1862.

General HALLECK:

I am reminded by the inclosed letter from Doctor Dinwiddie, one of our most intelligent and reliable Union men, of the lamentable fate which awaits the condemned bridge-burners from this county and I join him in the hope that you will commute their punishment. I will make no argument for you have no time to read it if made but will add that the reasons indicated in Doctor Dinwiddie’s letter are those which I would amplify, adding further that Colonel Merrill’s command here has now in prison the two ring-leaders in the bridge-burning and the captains of the ignorant youths under sentence of death. These leaders’ names are Captains Watson and Petty. Merrill’s command, now in charge of Lieutenant-Colonel Shaffer, is doing great good for the Union cause here-great indeed, but still hard work to do and are doing it.

Very truly,

WM. F. SWITZLER.

[Inclosure.]

GREENLAND, MO., February 2, 1862.

Mr. W. F. SWITZLER.

DEAR SIR: I take the liberty to write you a few lines to try to get you to use your influence in behalf of those men who are sentenced to execution for burning bridges, &c. Two of these, namely, Stephen Stott and John Patton, were my nearest neighbors and I feel a great deal of sympathy for them and their friends. Each of them have an aged mother, brothers and sisters living in sight of my house with whom I greatly sympathize, and if anything can be done to influence General Halleck or whoever has the power to pardon them or commute their punishment I would be glad to have it done.

My reasons for desiring their pardon are many and such as in my estimation ought to have much influence with the authorities if duly considered. First. These men are comparatively ignorant. Neither of these, my neighbors, knows a word of the alphabet, consequently unable to get any information from reading and I am certain that they have been coaxed and persuaded into this matter fraudulently by false representations by wicked and designing men and had they known the consequences or the penalty for such conduct they never would have engaged in it. Secondly. If General Halleck’s order had been issued {p.263} prior to the commission of these crimes and the penalty clearly set before them then there would be less palliation for their crimes. I think under the circumstances it would be a magnanimous act to exercise the attribute of mercy toward these deluded men. Thirdly. The execution of these men would have a most disastrous effect on the Union cause and would prove a very curse to the Union men who are scattered about the country in a defenseless condition. It will excite in the minds of friends of these men and secesh generally a spirit of revenge which will never be allayed except in the assassination of very many Union men, and if Governor Gamble or General Halleck wishes to do an act which will tend to restore quiet and benefit the Union men and save them from plunder and assassination let them pardon or commute the punishment of these men.

If the authorities do not wish to exercise mercy toward these prisoners I think they ought at least to do so as an act of mercy to those who have stood firm by the Union, and whose lives will be greatly endangered by the act. These with many other reasons which might be named I think ought to influence those in whose hands are the lives of these men. You will confer a favor on this whole community as well as myself if you will use your influence and get others in your city (Union men) to do the same in this matter. I would respectfully suggest that you and Guitar and Moss Prewitt and others of the same character present the case by letter or otherwise to Governor Gamble, General Halleck, and if proper to James S. Rollins to obtain the opinion of the President in the matter. I have no doubt but that the execution of these men would prove more disastrous to the good cause than anything or everything that has transpired in this region. If you are well disposed in this matter your immediate attention will be properly appreciated. If anything is done it ought to be done quickly.

Yours respectfully,

A. S. DINWIDDIE.

–––

CIRCULAR.]

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, Mo., February 14, 1862.

I. All persons who are known to have been in arms against the United States or to have actively aided the rebellion by word or deed are to be arrested. Those who are accused of acts in violation of the laws of war such as destruction of railroads and bridges or private property, firing into trains, assassination, &c., will not be released on any terms but will be held for trial before a military commission.

II. Notoriously bad and dangerous men though no specific act of disloyalty can be proven against them will be kept in custody and their cases referred to the commanding general.

III. Prisoners not included in either of the above classes may be released upon subscribing to the usual oath and giving a sufficient bond with good security for their future good conduct.

IV. The bond and oath should be of the form inclosed herewith.* The amount of the bond should in no case be less than $1,000 and in some cases should be much larger, varying according to the wealth, influence and previous conduct of the party. The security should in preference be a secessionist.

V. Persons now engaged in recruiting for the rebel army, also those enrolled for the rebel service, will be arrested and held as prisoners of {p.264} war. In addition to this all property belonging to such persons and which can be used for military purposes such as horses mules harness and wagons, beef cattle, forage, &c., will be seized and turned over to the provost-marshal to be disposed of according to the orders of the commanding-general of the department.

VI. Where persons who have been in the rebel service voluntarily come forward and take and subscribe to the oath of allegiance and parole and are released on bonds all property not of a military character taken from them will be restored.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

* Omitted as unimportant.

–––

HEADQUARTERS NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, February 14, 1862.

Lieutenant-Colonel HOLMES, Tenth Missouri Vols., President Mil. Coin., Danville, Mo.

COLONEL: I am directed by the commanding-general to inclose to you the accompanying testimony* against Col. Jeff. Jones, of Callaway County, for your information. Whenever you may judge that you have sufficient evidence to convict the said Jones or for other purposes shall think it best so to do you will summon him for trial before your commission and send to Fulton for such witnesses as you may think necessary. Colonel Morton will furnish whatever force may be requisite to execute your orders.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

C. S. SHELDON, Lieutenant and Aide-de-Camp.

* Not found. See trial of Jones, p. 176, and General Orders, No. 15, Department of the Mississippi, releasing Jones after his acquittal.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 15, 1862.

J. F. JONES, Esq.

SIR: I have not found time heretofore to answer your letter of the 5th instant* and now can say but little. I have no doubt you have suffered much inconvenience from the loss of the use of your teams, &c., and I have no more doubt that all you have been or will be made to suffer will fall far short of atoning for the misery caused by you not only to Union men but to the misguided dupes who have yielded to your baneful influence. The evil effect produced by the active influence of a man of your wealth and position can hardly be counterbalanced by the loss of a few wagons and horses. I would not, however, do any man injustice nor condemn without a fair trial even one whom I knew to be guilty. I will have your case investigated by the proper tribunal as soon as possible. Until this is done I can make no decision in the case. I should be gratified if you are found less guilty than I believe you to be.

Yours, truly,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

* Not found.

{p.265}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 44.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, February 20, 1862.

I. In consideration of the recent victories won by the Federal forces and of the rapidly increasing loyalty of citizens of Missouri who for a time forgot their duty to the flag and country the sentences of John O. Tompkins, William J. Forshey, John Patton, Thomas M. Smith, Stephen Stott, George H. Cunningham, Richard B. Crowder and George M. Pulliam,* heretofore condemned to death, are provisionally mitigated to close confinement in the military prison at Alton. If rebel spies again destroy railroads and telegraph lines and thus render it necessary for us to make severe examples the original sentences against these men will be carried into execution.

II. No further assessments will be levied or collected from any one who will now take the prescribed oath of allegiance.

III. Boards or commissions will be appointed to examine the cases of prisoners of war who apply to take the oath of allegiance and on their recommendation orders will be issued from these headquarters for their release.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

* See “Trial of the Bridge Burners,” etc., pp. 374 to 406, for the proceedings against these men.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, February 21, 1862.

Maj. Gen. GEORGE B. MCCLELLAN, General-in-Chief, Washington.

GENERAL: For the events of the last two weeks I must refer you to my telegrams having had no time to write. Our successes on the Tennessee and Cumberland and in the Southwest together with the stringent measures taken here have completely crushed out the rebellion in this city and State; no more insurrections, bridge-burnings and hoisting of rebel flags.

...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

ALTON, ILL., February 22, 1862.

Col. BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

COLONEL: Allow me to suggest that you get General Schofield to instruct Colonel Burbank to recall the parole of Captain Sweeney, a desperado, who has committed more outrages in North Missouri than any other bandit of the whole secession horde. He is not a commissioned officer even in Price’s army and his character is so well known here that all the army officers and principal citizens complain-that he should be suffered to swagger about the streets and public places declaring that he would not observe his parole one moment longer than suits his convenience. All the secesh officers here have received new and elegant uniforms since General Hamilton paroled them. They were manufactured in Saint Louis by M. J. Murphy. They are making {p.266} quite a swell here. The army officers have generally quit the principal hotel on account of the swarm of gray uniforms. They do not like to mix with them. All the prominent secessionists are here in conclave with the rebel officers continually. They ought to be moved off to Chicago or some more distant point. What will I do with the poor devils released? They have not a cent. I am in want of the blanks. We have examined about 300. I propose to them the alternative of the oath and bond or a parole to go home and await exchange. They all prefer the oath. Only some five or six prefer a parole and exchange. Those I will leave here. How about the bond? Shall I give them parole of three weeks to fill and return it?

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

THO. C. FLETCHER.

[Indorsement.]

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, February 28, 1862.

COMMANDING OFFICER, Alton:

Direct that Captain Sweeney’s parole be withdrawn and he be returned to prison. The paroles of all other officers now in Alton will also be withdrawn and they be sent with an escort to Columbus, Ohio.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. McLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HICKORY PLACE, CAR ROLL COUNTY, MO., February 24, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Commanding.

DEAR SIR: Circumstances by which myself with others are surrounded make it necessary that I should trouble you for the moment. I was discharged as a prisoner of war on the 18th instant by taking an oath of allegiance to the General Government of the United States. To maintain that oath inviolate is my greatest ammunition. General, I should never have been anything but a Union man if it had not been for the outrages of men who call themselves home guards and who never belonged to any regular army. The night after I got home while in my bed very sick there were ten of those jayhawkers who broke into my house and abused me very much. After leaving my house they went to an old man’s house who was perfectly blind with a helpless family dependent upon him and took from him almost half he possessed on earth. He was a man who had never taken either side in any way whatever.

They are doing a vast amount of injury to the Union cause by driving hundreds to Price’s army. I am satisfied that if this thing was put down that under no circumstances could Price get ten men in this county; otherwise hundreds will be driven there by desperation. They go round of nights stealing every good horse, saddle, bridle, whisky and goods of every description. The regular troops do not allow such where they are. These men are of the lowest order never having owned a cent’s worth of actual property in their lives. If we had one dozen regular troops stationed at DeWitt, a town within one mile of me, they could soon put it down in this neighborhood. I should not be so plain on this subject if I had not conscientiously taken an oath {p.267} to maintain, support and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States, while I therefore believe it to be my duty to look after the interests of that Government.

You, sir, will exercise your own judgment in this matter, while I remain, truly, your most humble and obedient servant,

WM. C. BERRY.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, February 24, 1862.

Col. THOMAS MORTON Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers, Commanding, Danville, Mo.

COLONEL:

...

Prisoners on trial or to be tried by a military commission are still in charge of the post commanders though held subject to the orders of the commission when approved. You will therefore send the required list of prisoners in confinement without delay. In conclusion I must request that in the future there may be more punctuality and exactness in compliance with orders.

By request of Brigadier-General Schofield:

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHARLES S. SHELDON, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, February 25, 1862.

Lieut. S. W. BARD, Provost-Marshal, Glasgow, Mo.

LIEUTENANT: The commanding general directs that all persons held in custody or on parole at your post accused of violations of the laws of war as set forth in section I of the inclosed circular* shall be sent under guard to Columbia for trial, before the military commission now in session at that place. Prisoners of war will be sent to the provost-marshal at Saint Louis under guard. All others not included in section II. will be released on bond and oath. The bonds will be sent to these headquarters a list being kept at your office for record.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHARLES S. SHELDON, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

* See circular, p. 263.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 48.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, Mo., February 26, 1862.

I. The public press has given circulation to the following correspondence:

General E. A. PAINE, Commanding, Cairo:

Yesterday (February 5) several companies of our cavalry with one company of Ross’ infantry scoured the country west bringing in 50 prisoners. Our cavalry also {p.268} encountered a large force of rebel cavalry fifteen miles beyond Bloomfield. They succeeded in routing them, killing 7, wounding many and taking 20 prisoners. We had 2 missing and 1 wounded. They found 5 bodies known to be Union men murdered.

W. P. KELLOGG, Colonel, Commanding.

Colonel KELLOGG, Commanding, Cape Girardeau:

Hang one of the rebel cavalry for each Union man murdered and after this two for each. Continue to scout, capture and kill.

E. A. PAINE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

General Paine in explanation of the foregoing says that at the time he received the dispatch of Colonel Kellogg he supposed they caught the rebel cavalry in the act.

The major-general commanding takes the earliest opportunity to publish his disapproval of this order. It is contrary to the rules of civilized war, and if its spirit should be adopted the whole country would be covered with blood. Retaliation has its limits and the innocent should not be made to suffer for the acts of others over whom they have no control.

II. Again by whom was this official correspondence furnished to the press in violation of the Army regulation and repeated general orders? The imputation must rest upon the two officers concerned until they account for the publication.

III. ... Hereafter any officer who publishes without proper authority any information respecting the movements of our armies even of battles won, or any official papers, will be arrested and tried by a court-martial and the Secretary of War has directed that the whole edition of the newspaper publishing such information be seized and destroyed.

...

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, Mo., February 26, 1862.

Captain HERRON, Third Iowa Volunteers, Commanding Huntsville, Mo.

CAPTAIN: You will be guided in your treatment of prisoners by the inclosed circular.* In all cases of bad and dangerous men they will be kept and evidence sought. Soldiers from Price’s army may be put under bonds if judged advisable and they have not been engaged in violations of the laws of war. Negroes will not as a general thing be regarded as property subject to seizure, and when taken for urgent reasons the same must be immediately reported to this office.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHARLES S. SHELDON, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

* No inclosure found. Probably refers to the circular of February 14, p. 263.

{p.269}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, March 7, 1862.

Colonel HOLMES, Danville, Mo.: (By telegraph to Florence.)

Take Sail’s bond to reappear, adjourn sine die and join your regiments. The commission cannot be dissolved till its proceedings are approved. Tell Colonel Morton to turn over all prisoners to Colonel Krekel, provost-marshal at Saint Charles.

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS. DISTRICT NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, Mo., March 11, 1862.

Lieut. Col. A. KREKEL, Missouri State Militia, Comdg. Post Saint Charles, Mo.

COLONEL: The commanding general directs me to inform you that Col. Jeff. Jones may be released on $10,000 bonds to await the action of Major-General Halleck in his case. The original bond executed by him at Mexico, Mo., has been lost or mislaid.

...

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHARLES S. SHELDON, Acting Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT NORTH MISSOURI RAILROAD, Saint Louis, Mo., March 12, 1862.

Captain WARRENS, Fifth Regiment Missouri Cavalry, Warrenton, Mo.

CAPTAIN: An order has been sent you through Colonel Morsey to proceed with two companies to Troy, in Lincoln County, and occupy that place. I want you to use your utmost exertions to ferret out and bring to justice the insurgents and jayhawkers in that region. The general order a copy of which is inclosed* will be your general guide in the discharge of your duty. You will observe that a certain kind of property only is to be seized and that only from a particular class of persons; even this to be restored if the owner voluntarily gives himself up and is found to be such a one as should be released on bond and oath.

It is of the greatest importance that you prevent your men from committing depredations upon private property. The object is not so much to punish the rebels for what they have done as to prevent them from doing injury in the future. This is to be done by putting the incorrigible out of the way either by death or imprisonment and by securing the good conduct of others through the obligation of a bond and oath while many may be reclaimed by justice mingled with kindness.

It is reported that there is an extensive organization in Lincoln and adjoining counties of men who are determined to continue their insurgent operations apparently for the purpose of plunder and revenge. {p.270} Let none of these escape you and be careful not to release improper persons on any conditions. I hope to hear the best reports from your command.

Yours, very truly,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

* Omitted.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 2.}

HDQRS. DEPT. OF THE MISSISSIPPI, Saint Louis, March 13, 1862.

I. Martial law has never been legally declared in Missouri except in the city of Saint Louis and on and in the immediate vicinity of the railroads and telegraph lines. And even in these localities military officers are especially directed not to interfere with the lawful process of any loyal civil court. It is believed that the time will soon come when the rebellion in Missouri may be considered as terminated and when even the partial and temporary military restraint which has been exercised in particular places may be entirely withdrawn. By none is it more desired than by the general commanding.

II. It must, however, be borne in mind that in all places subject to the incursions of the enemy or to the depredations of insurgents and guerrilla bands the military are authorized without any formal declaration of martial law to adopt such measures as may be necessary to restore the authority of the Government and to punish all violations of the laws of war. This power will be exercised only where the peace of the country and the success of the Union cause absolutely require it.

III. Evidence has been received at these headquarters that Maj. Gen. Sterling Price has issued commissions or licenses to certain bandits in this State authorizing them to raise guerrilla forces for the purpose of plunder and marauding. General Price ought to know that such a course is contrary to the rules of civilized warfare and that every man who enlists in such an organization forfeits his life and becomes an outlaw. All persons are hereby warned that if they join any guerrilla band they will not if captured be treated as ordinary prisoners of war but will be hung as robbers and murderers. Their lives shall atone for the barbarity of their general.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS SAINT LOUIS DISTRICT Saint Louis, Mo., March 13, 1862.

Major CALDWELL, Third Iowa Cavalry, Mexico, Mo.

MAJOR: You were correct in deciding that no terms but unconditional surrender of themselves and their arms could be granted to the rebels.

It may be well, however, to let them know that those who come in voluntarily are likely to be treated much more leniently than others. Thus General Halleck’s circular provides that those who give themselves up may be released on bonds and oath and receive back all property taken from them except that of a military character while those captured are to be held as prisoners of war.

{p.271}

It must of course rest with the military authorities to decide after a full knowledge of the case whether a prisoner who has surrendered himself voluntarily can be released on any terms, and no promise of release can be given before arrest or surrender unless the character and conduct of the party is known.

Those who commit acts of rebellion and insurrection within the territory occupied by our troops are not entitled to be treated even as prisoners of war and probably will not be much longer. If the influential secessionists want to preserve peace and save their deluded friends from severe punishment they may as well take the fact above mentioned as the basis of their actions.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

–––

OFFICE OF PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, March 17, 1862.

Maj. JOHN Y. CLOPPER, Commanding Post at Sturgeon.

MAJOR: The assistant adjutant-general at headquarters has referred your letter* of the 14th instant to this office for reply. The taking an oath and giving a bond is not designed to operate as an amnesty for irregular warfare, bridge-burning, robbing, &c. Such persons are not to be discharged on oath and bond; only such as have been engaged in regular warfare are to be thus released. The oath taken by Burks and the bond given by him are no protection to him for offenses such as bridge-burning. Arrest him, examine the witnesses and report their evidence fully to this office and hold him for further orders.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

B. G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTHWEST MISSOURI, Saint Joseph, Mo., March 18, 1862.

General J. M. SCHOFIELD, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: Late last night Colonel Catherwood returned from Liberty. In a conversation had with him I learn that the bandit, Quantrill, severely-perhaps mortally-wounded two recruits in the Missouri State Militia of those at Liberty. One was deliberately shot in cold blood after he had been taken as a prisoner. Eight were taken off as prisoners. The flag raised by General Prentiss was torn down and a secession one hoisted. Quantrill recrossed into Jackson County. Colonel Catherwood tore down the rebel flag and ran up the stars and stripes in its place. He left about forty-five men, part of Captain Johnson’s company, in Liberty; the remainder would be ordered there to-day. I also learn from Colonel Catherwood that Parker stopped the steam-boat Rowena and after examining the manifest and finding the principal part of the cargo shipped to Messrs. he selected about six dozen pairs of boots and some other articles which he took and then permitted the boat to resume her trip. Colonel Catherwood {p.272} also informed me that among the prisoners captured were Henry L. Routt, a lawyer of Liberty, a most notorious rebel and a very desperate man. He has been charged with instigating the arrest of ex-Governor King last fall and of Judge Birch more recently. I suppose there can be no trouble in showing him to have been very extensively and actively engaged in the rebellion. Also President Thompson, a Baptist preacher and president of the Liberty College, it is said a very bitter, violent and bad man. He is certainly a man of ability. I think they ought to be sent to Saint Louis or confined outside of the State.

I have here in jail Robert W. Donnell, president of the Branch Bank of the State of Missouri at this place; Israel Landis and William K. Richardson, citizens of this place. They have been very active aiders in the rebellion. They are confined in jail for refusing to give bond as required by General Halleck’s late circular. They persistently refuse to permit their friends to give the required bail although they have voluntarily offered even insisted on doing so. They-Donnell, Landis and Richardson-believe they are advancing the cause of the rebellion (they are professing Christians) by remaining in jail. In my opinion it would be advisable to remove them without the State. In their absence I doubt not many of their adherents being relieved of their presence and influence would return to their allegiance. To-morrow two companies-viz, Captains Phelps’ and Drumhiller’s-will start for Liberty under command of Colonel Kimball. Captain Johnson with his company is there, and Captain Folmsbee with his company from Gallatin will be ordered there as soon as they are paid which will be in a day or two.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

BEN. LOAN, Brigadier-General, Missouri State Militia.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE MILITIA, Saint Louis, Mo., March 21, 1862.

Brig. Gen. BENJAMIN LOAN, Saint Joseph, Mo.:

...

In a letter received a few days ago you spoke of certain influential rebels who obstinately refuse to take the oath and give bond. Send all of that class who are sufficiently influential to do harm to Saint Louis under guard. I will provide them with a comfortable home outside the State.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. M. SCHOFIELD, Brigadier-General.

–––

WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT-GENERAL’S OFFICE, March 25, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK, Saint Louis:

The President orders that execution of the sentence against E. Magoffin be suspended and that the record be transmitted to this office for his consideration. Answer by telegraph.

L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.

{p.273}

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF NORTHWEST MISSOURI, Saint Joseph, Mo., March 25, 1862.

Brig. Gen. J. M. SCHOFIELD, Missouri State Militia, Commanding, Saint Louis, Mo.

GENERAL: In pursuance of instructions contained in yours of date March 21, 1862,* I send to Saint Louis under guard Robert W. Donnell, Israel Landis and William K. Richardson, of this place, and Henry L. Routt and President Thompson, of Liberty. The first three are prominent secessionists here who were committed to jail some time since by the assistant provost marshal for obstinately refusing to give the bond as required by General Halleck’s late circular. Among the rebels we have had none more potent for evil than they. I suppose it is not necessary to send the evidence in their cases they having been decided by the provost-marshal here. If I am in error in this I can have it forwarded.

Routt and Thompson were taken at Liberty at the time Colonel Catherwood was there after Quantrill. I do not know whether the evidence has been taken in their cases but it is not more necessary in Routt’s case than it would be in Parsons’, Rains’, or perhaps General Price’s should he be captured. Routt’s misdeeds are almost numberless and I presume he will not pretend to deny them. President Thompson is president of the college at Liberty, a Baptist preacher. I do not know personally of his conduct but in the public estimation he has done all that it is possible for a man of his very superior abilities and acquirements and of his commanding influence could do for the cause of the rebels. If necessary I can have the evidence sent from Liberty.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

BEN. LOAN, Brigadier-General, Missouri State Militia, Commanding District.

* Omitted.

–––

HDQRS. RECRUITING STATION, MISSOURI STATE MILITIA, Warrensburg, March 25, 1862.

Brig. Gen. JAMES TOTTEN, Commanding District of Central Missouri.

GENERAL: The General Orders, No. 2,* from Major-General Halleck, dated Department of the Mississippi, March 13, 1862, has caused some stir among the guerrilla bands of this part of the country. One Mat. Houx who is a leader among them sent me a messenger to-day asking upon what terms they would be permitted to return to their homes if at all. He represents that there are as many as 300 who are willing to submit upon reasonable terms. He also intimates that in case they are to be treated as outlaws they will ruin the country, burning houses and murdering loyal men. These men are not in a body but scattered in squads of ten or fifteen. We have not a sufficient force at this place to prevent the execution of the threat-our whole force being about sixty.

I am, general, your obedient servant,

EMORY S. FOSTER, Major, Recruiting Missouri State Militia.

* See p. 270.

{p.274}

–––

WAR DEPARTMENT, March 25, 1862.

Governor B. MAGOFFIN, Frankfort, Ky.:

President’s order sent by telegraph to General Halleck as requested* by Governor Crittenden to suspend execution of sentence against E. Magoffin and to send record here for President’s consideration.

J. F. LEE, Judge-Advocate.

* Not found. Probably a verbal request made to the President.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 13.}

HDQRS., DEPT. OF THE MISSISSIPPI, Saint Louis, March 30, 1862.

I. Commanders of army corps, divisions, and brigades and of military districts where their commands are equal to a brigade are authorized to order military commissions to try offenses against the laws of war which are not triable by general court-martial. But all sentences of such commissions extending to loss of life, or confiscation of property, or imprisonment exceeding the term of thirty days must be confirmed by the commanding general of the department.

II. The attention of all such commanders and of all officers of military commissions is called to General Orders No. 1, of 1862, Department of the Missouri, in relation to the powers and duties of commissions as distinguished from courts-martial.

By command of Major-General Halleck:

N. H. MCLEAN, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

JEFFERSON CITY, April 1, 1862.

General TOTTEN.

SIR: In compliance with your request I subjoin some particulars with respect to the arrest and maltreatment of Dr. Sidney Robinson and others. They were furnished me by his daughter now in this city and to her by John Morris, James Morris, William McCloud and Slocum, Union men, Living near Versailles. The soldiers professed to hail from Jefferson City. Two of the privates are named respectively Stillett and Kelley. Doctor Robinson was arrested last Sunday morning in Versailles whither he had gone to attend a sick grandchild. His hands were bound, a rope adjusted to his neck and other preparations for hanging him made. Finally it was proposed to let him off if he would take the oath. He refused and then it was announced that he would be sent to Cairo. Among others arrested were the following named: Mick Jetter, Mick Robinson and Johnson. One of these was twice suspended until senseless.

Doctor Robinson is one of those who claim that a man may be a political secessionist, a believer in the right of peaceable secession and yet not a disloyal citizen. I have had opportunities to know and I have yet to learn that he ever counseled disloyalty. At various times he has turned his house into a temporary hospital for the benefit of Union soldiers, and in one instance one of them dying under his roof he had him decently interred at his own expense. Doctor Robinson has personal enemies in his neighborhood of fifteen years’ standing. They are now Union men and have had him arrested four times already on charges of disloyalty. They no doubt instigated the present {p.275} arrest. I believe he recognizes the right of the Federal military authorities to impose the oath of allegiance. At present laboring under a galling sense of mistreatment he will probably object to taking it. If he cannot be finally discharged without taking it could he not be paroled for a brief period? A little kind treatment I think would completely disarm him.

Respectfully,

C. J. CORWIN.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE MILITIA, Saint Louis, Mo., April 1, 1862.

Capt. C. H. WARRENS, Commanding Troy, Mo.:

I am instructed by the commanding general to direct you to make the following disposition of prisoners now held by you. All those who have been in any way connected with the operations of or belong to the recent bushwhacking gang or have had anything to do with recent acts of rebellion you will send under guard to Saint Charles for trial with all the evidence you can collect in their cases. Those who have returned from Price’s army or arrested for disloyal sentiments, &c., you will discharge upon their giving proper bonds and oath unless they are notoriously bad or dangerous characters. The bond you refer to is not here.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[C. W. MARSH,] Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE MILITIA, Saint Louis, Mo., April 2, 1862.

General BEN. LOAN, Saint Joseph, Mo.:

Evidence having been brought to the commanding general that Mr. H. L. Routt, of Liberty, was promised by General Prentiss that if he would sign a pledge to remain at home a law-abiding citizen he should not be subject to arrest and that he did give such pledge to Major James at Liberty on 1st of February last he desires that you send to him the charges against Mr. Routt and the names of witnesses.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

[C. W. MARSH,] Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, April 4, 1862.

Hon. EDWARD BATES, Attorney-General.

DEAR SIR: The spring term of the United States circuit court is now approaching and I write to obtain from you an official letter making some suggestions or rather giving some instructions as to the course which ought to be pursued by the civil authorities here concerning those who have been indicted either for treason or conspiracy. There is no doubt but that the amnesty held out by the governor under the direction of the convention has induced many to return sincerely to their allegiance and this may and doubtless does embrace some who have been indicted. There are some cases where they have returned and taken the steps prescribed by the military authorities and in those {p.276} cases an effort to enforce the criminal code might materially interfere with the military arrangements and produce disturbances where there would otherwise be quiet.

Of course it would not do to lay down any general rule but each case must more or less be governed by its own peculiar circumstances. Nevertheless I would like to know what the general policy of the Government is so that I may be governed by it during the ensuing term of the court.

Yours, truly,

JAS. O. BROADHEAD, U. S. District Attorney.

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., April 4, 1862.

Capt. LEWIS MANKER, Provost-Marshal, Sedalia, Mo.

CAPTAIN: You will dispose of prisoners as follows:

First. Those who have been engaged in regular warfare or are arrested for general disloyalty you may release on their taking the oath and giving a bond with good security in a sum not less than $1,000 proportionate to their means.

Second. Those who have been engaged in irregular warfare, burning bridges, firing into trains, robbing Union men, &c., you will take the evidence against them in writing and send it up to this office holding them for further orders.

In all cases where prisoners are sent to your post and you have not the evidence in their cases send them to Saint Louis by first opportunity and a list to this office.

Very respectfully,

BERNARD G. FARRAR, Provost-Marshal-General.

–––

WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington City, D. C., April 5, 1862.

Major-General HALLECK, Saint Louis:

Your General Orders, No. 11, relating to Ellis’ case, and No. 9, Kirk’s case, have been received.* They are heartily approved and the form of procedure will be directed to be observed in all other departments in like cases.

EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War.

* For trial of Edmund J. Ellis and Halleck’s approval of sentence, see p. 453. For General Orders, No. 9, Department of the Mississippi, covering the case of William Kirk, see p. 404.

–––

EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, April 9, 1862-12.45 p.m.

Major-General HALLECK, Saint Louis, Mo.:

If the rigor of the confinement of Magoffin at Alton is endangering his life or materially impairing his health I wish it mitigated so far as it can be consistently with his safe detention.

A. LINCOLN.

{p.277}

–––

ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S OFFICE, Washington, April 10, 1862.

JAMES O. BROADHEAD, Esq., U. S. Attorney Eastern District of Missouri. Saint Louis.

SIR: In answer to your letter of April 4 received yesterday it does not seem politic for me to give you at this critical moment when great changes are being made in our military and political relations with the revolted States any minute and particular instructions touching the prosecutions for treason and for conspiracy now pending in the U. S. circuit court at Saint Louis. Much must be left to your own wise discretion. A few points however may be properly stated, and first Governor Gamble’s amnesty must be respected and made effectual. Besides that it is right in itself. I understand that the President is personally pledged to it. Second, it is not desirable to try many treason cases nor any one in which you have not a great probability of success. Better enter a nolle prosequi than be beaten. And in view of the great changes now taking place I am in no hurry to press the trial indictments for treason. After a few more military successes we may see the way of prudence more clearly. As to minor offenses such as conspiracy, plunder of public property, obstruction of the mails and the like you must judge for yourself.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

EDWARD BATES.

P. S.-While writing the above your other letter of April 4* touching the case of Henry L. Routt was handed me. Does not that case fall within Governor Gamble’s amnesty? My first impression is that it is a proper case for pardon but as I have barely read your letter and that of Mr. Samuel’s I must take a little time to consider. If my final conclusion concurs with my first thought it will cause the pardon to be issued very soon.

EDWD. BATES.

* Not found.

–––

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Jefferson City, Mo., April 10, 1862.

Lieut. Col. J. H. BLOOD, Commanding, Tipton, Mo.

COLONEL: It is represented that you have in confinement at your post one Dr. Sydney Robinson, a citizen living in the vicinity of Versailles, Morgan County. It is represented that a Lieutenant Walldorf, Company I, Sixth Missouri Volunteers, caused the arrest of the said Doctor Robinson; that at the time of the arrest of Doctor Robinson Lieutenant Walldorf caused and permitted a rope to be adjusted around the said doctor’s neck and made preparations for hanging him, Upon the doctor’s objection to this outrageous and unauthorized treatment and refusing to take the oath of allegiance under such circumstances he threatened to send Doctor Robinson to Cairo but finally caused him to be conducted to your post.

It is also represented that other persons were maltreated by the party under command of Lieutenant Walldorf in the vicinity of Versailles, viz, N. Jetter, M. Robinson and one Johnson, one of whom was twice Suspended by the neck until senseless. It is further represented that Doctor Robinson at the time he was arrested was on a visit to Versailles to a sick grandchild and quietly performing his legitimate occupation.

{p.278}

It is represented that Doctor Robinson has never taken up arms against or given aid and comfort to the enemies of the Government but that he is simply a sympathizer with the Southern element; that he has prevented, however, his son from joining the rebel army and that he has at Various times turned his house into a temporary hospital for the benefit of Union soldiers, and in one instance one of these dying under his roof he had him decently buried at his own expense.

If these representations be correct as above set forth Lieutenant Walldorf and his party deserve the severest punishment for their outrageous disregard of law, order and discipline. Lieutenant Walldorf has violated the orders of General Halleck published at various times for the regulation of arrests and he must answer for his disregard of these orders. You will therefore call upon the said officer for an explicit statement and full report in the cases above cited; you will also investigate the matter yourself with all the scrutiny essential to such an important case, and if you find Lieutenant Walldorf and the members of his party have been guilty of the conduct set forth against them and have acted unauthorizedly without orders from yourself you will arrest and prefer charges against all concerned in the affair and transmit a full report of the matter in this case along with said charges to these headquarters.

If there are no charges which can be substantiated against Doctor Robinson of his having openly taken up arms against the Government of the United States or of his having aided and abetted treason you will require him to take the oath of allegiance to the United States and give bonds for his future loyal good conduct to the amount of $1,000, after which you will release him and allow him to return to his home without any further molestation.

You are requested to make a report immediately upon this affair.

I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

LUCIEN J. BARNES, Captain and Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Tipton, Mo., April 10, 1862.

Capt. LUCIEN J. BARNES, Assistant Adjutant-General:

F. A. Walldorf, acting lieutenant, has submitted to me a statement of which the following is a copy:

Yours was duly received, and in regard to the hanging match I have to say that it was done at Captain Rice’s suggestion and approval and that the statements of my guides led me to conclude that Mr. Sidney Robinson was actually connected with a gang of jayhawkers who were traced from his house. Further I would remark that when I said he should not be hanged if he could find one man to speak in his favor as a just, honest, good Union man all (with one exception, one who was arrested by Captain Rice as a spy) testified that they knew no good of him. The second person (a boy) did acknowledge being connected with said jayhawkers and described the horses. Mrs. Crook I am informed had been harboring a secesh recruiting officer and recruits and the appearance of the house led me to think it was so. No white person was about the house and the negroes said they left when the troops came in town. Upstairs all the carpets seemed to be brought up and used as beds with blankets, quilts, &c., and on the lower floors no carpets were used. Mike Chism was said to have boarded a part of the men and he was a near neighbor. Also the house contained ten or twelve empty canisters of the kind known as powder canisters.

Yours, very respectfully,

F. A. WALLDORF, [Acting] Lieutenant, Sixth Missouri Infantry.

J. H. BLOOD, Lieutenant-Colonel, Commanding Post.

{p.279}

–––

HEADQUARTERS MISSOURI STATE MILITIA, Saint Louis, Mo., April 12, 1862.

Col. ARNOLD KREKEL, Saint Charles, Mo.:

I am directed by the commanding general to instruct you to forward under guard to this city the prisoners sentenced by the military commission which convened at Danville and ordered by Major-General Halleck in General Orders, No. 15, dated headquarters Department of the Mississippi, Saint Louis, April 3, 1862, to be confined in the military prison at Alton. The officer in command of the guard will report to these headquarters for further orders. Send them by the morning train. Inclosed find official copy of General Orders, No. 15.

Respectfully,

[C. W. MARSH,] Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

HEADQUARTERS, Tipton, Mo., April 12, 1862.

Capt. LUCIEN J. BARNES, Assistant Adjutant-General:

For some time previous to the 20th of March daily complaints came to headquarters of outrages committed upon Union citizens living in and around Versailles most of which could be traced to a band of some fifteen or twenty jayhawkers. These were all perpetrated during the night time. Those taking the most active part in these matters were disguised in some manner, as with false whiskers, slouched hats, army overcoats, &c., which led to the conclusion that they were citizens of that part of the country. On the evening of March 22 they fell upon two Federal soldiers and stripped them completely of all their clothes.

Becoming so bold I determined to find them out and bring them to justice. With this intention I secretly fitted out an expedition to start from here late in the day in wagons and arrive late in the evening at an appointed place in the infested neighborhood. I had selected good men for the purpose and had prepared full instructions. The evening of the 24th of March was the one selected for putting in execution the plan. The orders for the Moniteau County expedition and the substitution of Company D for Company H at this post entirely disarranged the arrangement. The result was Acting Lieutenant Walldorf and men of Company D were sent by Captain Van Deusen instead of those I had selected.

I deem this preliminary statement necessary, first, to show the necessity of the expedition; second, to show how it was that Walldorf came to go in command. From all the evidence I can obtain relating to the trip I submit the following summary-leaving you to decide upon the merits whether those concerned shall be held to answer in the manner referred to by you in your note ordering an investigation: I have examined numerous persons in regard to the affairs in question and their testimony is all to the same effect in regard to the hanging. Acting Lieutenant Walldorf requested three of the State militia, two citizens, and Edward Tigh, of Company I, Sixth Missouri Volunteers, to act as jury upon the case, believing as they did that he (Robinson) was connected with the band of jayhawkers whom they supposed they had traced from his house by numerous horse tracks leading therefrom. Mr. William V. Parks, a man well known as a reliable person (one of the citizens), acted as foreman. The decision, of this jury was that {p.280} although justice required immediate hanging mercy should hold him for a less prompt retribution. ’Tis true a rope was adjusted around his neck but he was not harmed at all.

Up to this point after his arrest he had been very abusive, using expressions like the following: “All your devilish artillery can’t make me take an oath to support such a Constitution as you are fighting for,” and “all the devils in hell combined with all the military power of the United States could never make a Union man of me.” There were some fifteen citizens gathered and none of them would say a word in his behalf when called upon to do so and all the testimony of his neighbors and the Union men of Morgan County goes to show that they believe him deserving of the most extreme penalty of the law, and I may add the women got up a petition praying that he be kept during the war at least. All these circumstances combined with his statement to Mr. Parks that he would arm his negroes and had bought revolvers for every member of his family justly led Walldorf to believe him capable of being a leader in this system of jayhawking.

All the Union citizens I have seen uphold him (Walldorf) in his course and say, “He is just the one for their country.” The representations made to you are if I am any judge in the matter widely apart from the facts. He has often been seen “packing arms.” He has by his own confession given comfort to enemies of the Government. He not only did not prevent his son joining the rebel army but furnished him a horse to go with and if Union soldiers have occupied his house as a hospital nobody I can find knows of it.

Regarding his giving up the house of Mrs. Crook to plunder I have collected the following facts: He was directed there by some citizen with the idea that a recruiting officer stopped there; arriving none but negroes could be found who on being questioned separately said that they had gone when the soldiers first came into the neighborhood and that there were sixteen of them. Other testimony goes to show that a large squad were there the day before. These circumstances and the appearance of the house inside were conclusive evidence that Mrs. Crook had been harboring the enemy to an alarming extent and decided Walldorf to give the house up for pillage. A son of Mrs. Crook lately from Price’s army was also known to have been there. (Mrs. Crook has recovered many of her things.)

The above statement contains the facts I have been able to collect regarding the questionable conduct of Acting Lieutenant Walldorf. The discrepancies between the information furnished you and the facts as they exist have decided me to forward this statement and await your further orders before preferring the charges called for by yours of the 10th instant.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

J. H. BLOOD, Lieutenant-Colonel Sixth Missouri Volunteers, Comdg. Post.

P. S.-I omitted to state that the other person who was hung most (a person by the name of Chittenden) confessed his complicity with the gang, told five names connected with it and said there were ten or twelve others; also described some of the horses they had stolen and said the gang left that morning and would camp that night on Buffalo Creek twenty miles distant. News has just come of the apprehension of some of the gang at Warsaw, one John McCloud riding a horse stolen from the Mr. Parks referred to above among them.

J. H. B

{p.281}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 17.}

HDQRS. DIST. OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Jefferson City, Mo., April 22, 1862.

I. It is with feelings of unfeigned horror at the hellish crimes perpetrated and a profound loathing, abhorrence and disgust for the fiendish outlaws who committed them that the brigadier-general commanding the District of Central Missouri once more calls the attention of the U. S. troops both volunteer and Missouri State Militia under his command to the necessity of increased and constant vigilance tempered with caution and prudence as well as justice and protection toward the innocent, in order that these great, growing and terrible outrages of every sort may be put an end to and the outlaws infesting the district exterminated.

Reports of murders, robberies and indeed of every crime known as felony and less criminal offenses reach these headquarters from every part of the district so that it has become dangerous for peaceful, law-abiding citizens and especially good Union citizens to pursue their legitimate vocation without molestation and imminent danger. The country is infested with bands of murderers, robbers and other outlaws of every shade of turpitude known to the criminal calendar, and in some instances (as recent evidence too plainly proves) these wretches are disguised under the uniform of our patriotic army and are pretending to act under and by authority of the United States. These base and bloodthirsty beasts in human form have by their deeds, their boasts and their threats placed themselves beyond the pale of law and must be dealt with accordingly. As the innocent victims of these miscreants are made to suffer without cause and without trial or hearing of any sort (save their cries for mercy uttered in the agonies of terror and death which pass unheeded) so must their brutal, lawless and vandal tormentors be dealt with and no mercy shown them. Reasoning with outlaws is of no avail. The law and its faithful officers are set at defiance by these armed and ruthless agents of anarchy and hence they must be subjected to their own code and punished without mercy upon the spot when found enacting or banded together for the enactment of their foul deeds. It is therefore ordered for the observance of all concerned:

II. That hereafter whenever and wherever bands of guerrillas, jayhawkers, marauders, murderers, &c., are found in arms in open opposition to the laws and legitimate authorities of the United States and the State of Missouri the miscreants of which they are composed are to be shot down by the military authorities when commanded by commissioned officers upon the spot where caught perpetrating their foul acts. And at all times and in all places when our troops no matter by whom commanded are forcibly opposed by outlaws these latter are to be exterminated at all hazards.

III. That all persons who have or shall in future knowingly harbor or in any manner encourage guerrillas, jayhawkers, robbers, murderers or other outlaws in their nefarious deeds will be arrested and kept in close confinement until tried by a military commission or other court as may be deemed expedient at the time.

IV. That where evidence cannot be produced to establish the guilt of parties accused of harboring and encouraging the lawless marauders, &c., above named but against whom there is strong circumstantial evidence and suspicion they are to be placed under heavy bonds with good and reliable security to keep the peace and for their future good {p.282} conduct and also required to take the oath of allegiance; and when they refuse or neglect to do this they are to be confined and so held until released by proper authority.

By order of Brig. Gen. James Totten, commanding district:

LUCIEN J. BARNES, Captain and Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

Trial by Military Commission of Bridge-Burners, Marauders, Etc.

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 10.}

HDQRS. WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, Mo., September 12, 1861.

I. Before the military commission which convened at the Saint Louis Arsenal on the 5th instant, pursuant to Special Orders, No. 118, current series, from these headquarters, the following prisoners were arraigned, viz:

Phinneas P. Johnson, William Shiftell, Jerome Nail, John Williams, James R. Arnold, Charles Lewis, John Deane, Doctor Steinhoner, W. W. Lynch, T. J. Sappington, James Thompson, Thomas Grigsby, John Crow, David E. Perryman, John W. Graves, Alfred Jones, William Durnham, C. H. Hodges, James Marr, G. S. Yertes.

Many of the prisoners above named were found without any charge whatever lodged against them; others had but trivial charges, and being unable to procure witnesses in their respective cases the commission deemed it expedient to have the same released which was carried into effect after a rigid cross-examination and having the oath of allegiance duly administered in each individual case.

The commission would respectfully report to the commanding major-general that they have found imprisoned in the arsenal a great many persons charged with being spies and traitors. These charges were not sustained by any evidence whatever. The persons taking them prisoners did in most cases send no names of witnesses along. In others the names of witnesses were sent without their address and residences. Some were sent here prisoners because one Union man considered them dangerous.

The commission has felt itself obliged to release most of these prisoners. Some suspicious looking were retained on no further evidence than their own confession and suspicious appearance and behavior.

The commission would respectfully suggest that orders be issued preventing persons from being arrested unless there is some strong circumstantial proof of facts of which your commission can avail itself. It seemed to your commission, even, and it is with deep regret that they are compelled to report such things to you, that in few cases men were arrested as spies and traitors and sent here because they raised objections when their property was taken away. In other cases their property was taken while they were absent in prison without any cause whatever.

...

The reflections contained in the report of the proceedings have occurred to the commanding general. He is surprised to find that in many of the cases no evidence whatever has been presented to the commission. He concurs in the opinion expressed relative to groundless charges against citizens, unwarrantable seizures of their persons and unjust depredations upon their property.

The attention of commanders is again called to the full observance of the orders that have been issued from these headquarters concerning arrests.

By order of Major-General Frémont:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

{p.283}

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 12.}

HDQRS. WESTERN DEPARTMENT, Saint Louis, Mo., September 16, 1861.

I. Before the military commission which convened at the Saint Louis Arsenal on the 5th instant, pursuant to Special Orders, No. 118, current series, from these headquarters, was tried-Joseph Aubuchon.

CHARGE: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that Joseph Aubuchon, of the town of Ironton, Iron County, State of Missouri, did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same, by assuming and exercising the functions and office of lieutenant in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after about the 20th day of August, 1861.

FINDING AND SENTENCE: The commission find the prisoner as follows:

Of the specification, guilty, except the words “By taking up arms against the same, by assuming and exercising the functions and office of lieutenant in the rebel army.”

Of the charge, guilty.

And does therefore sentence him, Joseph Aubuchon, “To be confined at hard labor during the existing war and to have his property confiscated.”

II. The proceedings, findings and sentence of the commission are approved.

On the recommendation of the members of the commission and in consideration of the fact the offense charged occurred previous to the proclamation of the commanding general of the department the sentence against Joseph Aubuchon is remitted. He will be released from confinement and permitted to return to his home.

By order of Major-General Frémont:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 2.}

HEADQUARTERS, Ironton, Mo., September 24, 1861.

Before the military commission which-convened at Ironton, Mo., September 21, 1861, was tried-

William Perry.

CHARGE: Treason against the United States Government.

The commission in the case of William Perry find him guilty of treason and sentence him to hard labor during the war, and all his real estate and personal property (if any there be) is hereby confiscated and declared the property of the United States.

II. The proceedings and finding of the commission in the case of William Perry are approved. Colonel Hovey, Thirty-third Illinois Volunteers, will see that the prisoner is kept at work on the fort at Ironton and that he is kept in charge of the guard when not at work. The commanding officer at Potosi will seize all personal property that may belong to said William Perry and forward it to the quartermaster at this post who will account for it to the United States and use it for the public service. The commanding officer at Potosi will also report if William Perry owns any real estate in or near Potosi.

By order of Colonel Carlin, commanding post:

A. L. BAILHACHE, Adjutant.

{p.284}

–––

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 10.}

HEADQUARTERS, Ironton, Mo., September 29, 1861.

Before the military commission convened at the Pilot Knob House on the 29th instant was tried-

William Hildebrand.

CHARGE: Treason against the United States Government.

The commission find the accused guilty of treason against the United States Government and do sentence him to hard labor during the existing war between the United States and the revolting States.

II. Before the same military commission was tried-

Thomas M. Cooper.

CHARGE Treason against the United States Government.

The commission find Thomas M. Cooper guilty of treason against the United States Government and do sentence him to hard labor during the existing war between the United States and the revolting States.

III. Before the same military commission was tried-

George W. Higginbotham.

CHARGE: Treason against the United States Government.

The commission find the charges against George W. Higginbotham not sustained and recommend that he be immediately discharged from confinement, and further ask that the commander of the post issue an order forbidding the arrest of persons without evidence of their guilt.

IV. Proceedings and findings of the military commission in the foregoing cases are approved. The sentences in the case of William Hildebrand and Thomas M. Cooper will be carried into effect by Col. J. W. S. Alexander, who will see that they work on the fort at Ironton in charge of a guard. George W. Higginbotham is released from arrest.

The commanding officer is reluctantly compelled to disapprove of the manner in which Mr. Higginbotham was arrested. While approving the zeal which dictated his arrest he most positively prohibits any deception by which people may be inveigled into an expression of their sympathies against the United States.

By order of W. P. Carlin, colonel commanding post:

A. L. BAILHACHE, Adjutant.

–––

Trial of William Hearst, accused of bridge-burning.

Proceedings of a military commission held at Saint Louis, Mo., by virtue of the following order:

SPECIAL. ORDERS, No. 51.

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December, 21, 1861.

...

IV. A military commission is hereby appointed to meet in this city on Monday, the 23d instant, at 10 a.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, for the trial of such persons as may be brought before it.

Detail for the commission: Brig. Gen. S. D. Sturgis, U. S. Army; Col. R. D. Cutts, of the staff; Lieut. Col. John Scott, Third Iowa Volunteers; Maj. E. W. Chamberlain, First Iowa Cavalry; Capt. T. W. Sweeny, Second Infantry, U. S. Army. Col. R. D. Cutts will act as judge-advocate and recorder.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

{p.285}

–––

SAINT LOUIS, MO., January 10, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment and the above order.

Present: Brig. Gen. S. D. Sturgis, U. S. Army; Col. R; D. Cutts, of the staff; Lieut. Col. John Scott, Third Iowa Volunteers; Maj. E. W. Chamberlain, First Iowa Cavalry.

The accused, William Hearst, and his counsel also present.

The judge-advocate having read the order convening the commission asked the accused, William Hearst, if he had any objection to any member named therein to which he replied that he had not. The commission was then sworn by the judge-advocate, the judge-advocate taking the oath at the same time as a member of the commission in the presence of the accused.

The accused was then arraigned upon the following charge and specification, which were read aloud to the commission by the judge-advocate:

CHARGE: Violation of the laws of war.

Specification-In this, that he, William Hearst, of Jefferson County, Mo., did aid and assist in the burning of the Iron Mountain Railroad bridge across Big River, Jefferson County, Mo., thus risking and putting in jeopardy the lives of innocent persons traveling on said road, the same being done in violation of the laws and usages of war. This on or about October 16, 1861.

The judge-advocate then addressed the accused as follows: “You, William Hearst, have heard the charge and specification preferred against you; how say you, guilty or not guilty?”

To which arraignment the accused pleaded as follows:

To the specification, not guilty.

To the charge, not guilty.

JOHN W. WILSON, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State your name, residence, and occupation.

Answer. John W. Wilson; reside at Big River bridge, Jefferson County, Mo.; am a farmer.

Question. Do you know the accused, and if so how long have you known him?

Answer. I know him, and have been acquainted with him for about fourteen years, but during four and one-half years of that time I was in California. I was in California from 1852 to 1856.

Question. Since your return have you been in the habit of seeing him often, and how far did he live from your house?

Answer. He lived about eight or nine miles from my house, and I have often seen him at Morse’s store and at post-office formerly kept at our house, and also at place where the post-office now is.

Question. Were you at home at the burning of Big River bridge, and how far did you live from it?

Answer. I was. I lived about 150 yards from it.

Question. Did you witness the burning of the bridge?

Answer. I saw it-the bridge on fire and the setting fire to the bridge. Before the burning of the bridge I was arrested by a man who called himself Jeff. Thompson. He released me, however, when some men spoke to him and told him I was a farmer who lived there. At the moment of my release I was about 200 yards from the bridge. I then met men coming with fire toward the bridge and I said to them, “For God’s sake, don’t burn the bridge; it will break us citizens up.” I recognized no one among the men going with firebrands in their hand toward the bridge but Mr. William Hearst. The firebrand held by him was about one and one-half feet long.

{p.286}

I then turned round and seeing some men taking my rails I went after them to prevent them, when they cursed me. As I went down to our house I met Perkins, and I looked back and saw the bridge on fire and a lot of men around the bridge-say twenty or twenty-five men-some standing on the bridge, the flames ablazing up on the sides, and other men standing on the embankment on Jefferson County side. There were also about twenty-five men on the other side of bridge beating and hammering, as if they were tearing up the track. I then went to our house and staid there about one and one-half to two hours and then went from our house to Blackwell Station, Saint Francois County. There I met a lot of men, citizens of the county, who had come in on hearing the firing. Saw bodies of two secessionists lying on the platform who had been killed by Lippincott’s men. Captain Lippincott (Illinois volunteers) had come to re-enforce Captain Elliott’s company at the bridge. There had been a fight early in the morning, about 7 a.m., between Captain Elliott’s company and the secessionists, and the former, about forty in number were taken prisoners by the latter. The secessionists then moved toward Blackwell Station where they were met by Captain Lippincott, both parties firing. I did not see but heard the firing. The bridge was burnt about 8 a.m. about the 15th of October, 1861. The bridge was burned while some of the secessionists, mostly cavalry, were on their way to Blackwell Station.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Were there any officers in command of the men who burned the bridge?

Answer. I suppose there were. Some had swords, some had long knives. Heard an order given by one man with captain’s straps on his shoulder and saw the order obeyed.

Question. Do you belong to any secret order or society of men by which you are bound by oath to do all in your power to punish Hearst as a deserter from the army of Jeff. Thompson?

Answer. I decline to answer.

By the COMMISSION:

Question. How near to bridge was accused when you saw him with firebrand in his hand, and did you see him apply the torch?

Answer. He was about thirty or forty yards from bridge. I spoke to him as he passed. Other men had just preceded him fifteen or twenty steps with firebrands in their hands. I did not know who they were. I did not see him apply the torch.

Question. Were the secessionists in uniform, or part of them only, and what proportion so far as you could judge?

Answer. I did not see any persons in uniform except the person who called himself Jeff. Thompson and the captain I have alluded to. The best part of them had overcoats on of different colors, and may have had uniforms on under them for all I know.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the evidence he had given was read to him and he was dismissed.

WILLIAM BLACKWELL, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State your name, occupation, and residence.

Answer. William Blackwell, of Saint Francois County; a farmer; and reside on Iron Mountain Railroad.

Question. How far do you live from Big River bridge?

Answer. Some 300 or 400 yards southeast of bridge.

Question. Do you know the accused, and how long have you known him, and were you accustomed to see him often?

Answer. Yes; some ten or twelve years. Saw him occasionally, at one time frequently, and at another time, when he moved to a greater distance, not so often.

{p.287}

Question. Were you present at the burning of the Big River bridge?

Answer. I was not at the bridge but saw it from my house aburning.

Question. Did you see any person engaged in the burning of bridge?

Answer. Yes, sir; I saw a good many men running down from the camp which they had captured on the hill, with something in their hands emitting smoke; appeared to be on fire. I was so far off I could not see the fire itself. I did not recognize Mr. Hearst in that crowd; I was so far off-300 or 400 yards-I could not recognize him, but recognized him after the bridge was on fire in the crowd going down the railroad line, and that was the last time I saw Mr. Hearst until he was a prisoner.

Question. How far were you from the accused when you recognized him?

Answer. I was close to him-a few paces off-as he passed my house. Can’t say whether he was armed or not. He was going southward when I saw him. There had been a fight in the morning before bridge was burned between Jeff. Thompson’s men and Captain Elliott. The latter were taken prisoners and disarmed after the fight at the bridge and the burning of it. There was also a fight at Blackwell Station.

Question. Did the fight at Blackwell [Station] take place after the bridge was burned?

Answer. After, sir-the firing was heard by me after I saw the bridge on fire.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. About how many men composed the army or company which passed your house going from the bridge?

Answer. I suppose there were about 140 or 150 men.

Question. Was any portion of railroad track torn up on the south, Saint Francois side, of the bridge?

Answer. I think there were a few rails torn up.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness, the evidence he had given was read to him and he was dismissed.

The examination by the prosecution was here closed.

HENRY P. BATES, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Are you acquainted with me?

Answer. Yes; I have known him since a boy.

Question. At what time did you see me last before my arrest and where?

Answer. I saw him about the 5th of November at my place of doing business, called Morse’s Mills, on Big River, Jefferson County, Mo.

Question. Did you request Captain Dover or other U. S. officer to arrest me, and at whose request did you do so, and for what reason?

Answer. I wrote to Captain Dover to go and arrest Mr. Hearst at his own solicitation. The reason, as he told me, using his own expression-that he had joined Jeff. Thompson’s army; that he was not going back there, and wished to be arrested as a prisoner of war of the United States; also that he wished to avail himself of the ordinance of the State convention and of the proclamation of Governor Gamble. The reason of his request to be arrested instead of giving himself up, as he stated, was that he feared the punishment that would be inflicted on him as a deserter in case he should fall into the hands of the rebel army.

Question. Did Captain Dover arrest me? If not, why?

Answer. No, sir; Captain Dover, being absent from his post, did not get my letter before he was arrested by Captain Miller, of the detective police.

{p.288}

Question. Did I go voluntarily to you and propose my arrest, and where was I arrested?

Answer. He came voluntarily to me and asked me if I could not have him arrested. I cannot say of my own knowledge where he was arrested; but before leaving I said to him, “William, where will you be found in case I send some one to arrest you?” And he answered that he would be found at home. At the time alluded to Mr. Hearst appeared quite penitent and could not speak of the subject without tears. I was not aware, at the time, that he was in the neighborhood.

Question. Do you know my past reputation as a citizen? and if so what has it been?

Answer. I have known Mr. Hearst for a long time; his general reputation was good-a good neighbor and fast friend when he was attached to any person. In point of education, very limited; he seldom reads. I would state that the present position of Mr. Hearst before this court was brought about by my advice to him.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Was he at home or in such position in regard to U. S. forces that he could or would have been arrested whether you had written to Captain Dover or not?

Answer. If he had not followed my advice and gone home he could have avoided being arrested.

Question. Was he within the lines of the U. S. forces at that time?

Answer. Yes, sir.

There being no further questions to propose to witness the evidence he had given was read to him and he was dismissed.

JOHN TOMES, a witness for defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Are you acquainted with me?

Answer. Not personally.

Question. State your knowledge of my acts showing an intention to avail myself of the benefit of the amnesty provided by the ordinance of the Missouri State convention passed on 16th of October, 1861, before the time of my arrest.

Answer. On or about the 3d of November last the brother of the accused came to me and said that he and his brother had come home with the intention of staying at home. He requested me to go to see Colonel Lawson the next morning (Monday) and state to Lawson that they had come home with the intention of staying, and to ask his advice whether they had better deliver themselves up to him or to troops at Big River bridge. I went to Lawson next morning, and he said he would go with them up to the force at Pilot Knob, if they would go up there with him. He said that if they would deliver themselves up as prisoners of war he would take them up to Pilot Knob. He told me to go back and tell them to keep out of the road until he could go up with them, as he had to go to Saint Louis, and would not be able to go up with them for a few days. I came back about 1 or 2 o’clock same day and told George Hearst, brother of accused, the message Colonel Lawson sent, and to tell his brother to keep out of the way until he, Lawson, returned from Saint Louis, for the reason that the troops at Big River bridge would treat him very roughly if they took him. There was a sick child at George’s house, so that he could not go down to his brother William’s house until Wednesday morning, and in the meantime they came and took his brother. The brother of accused came back the same evening and told me that his brother William was taken. George Hearst delivered himself up to Colonel Lawson, took the oath of allegiance, and is now at home with a pass. Colonel Lawson belongs to U. S. forces.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the evidence he had given was read to him and he was dismissed.

{p.289}

WILLIAM BLACKWELL, a witness for the prosecution, recalled.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Was Big River bridge the day before or some time previous to its being burned within the lines of the U. S. forces?

Answer. Yes; there were U. S. troops to the southward of bridge.

Evidence read to witness by judge-advocate and he was dismissed.

The accused represented to the commission that an important witness in his behalf was not in the city of Saint Louis, but would be here in two days; and having satisfied the commission that the evidence expected from said witness was necessary for his proper defense the case was postponed to Monday, January 13, at 10 a.m.

The commission then adjourned to meet to-morrow, Saturday, January 11, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., January 11, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present.

The absence of Capt. T. W. Sweeny, Second Infantry, U. S. Army, on yesterday was due to the fact as stated by him that he presented himself to the sentinels on Gratiot street, the route usually taken by members of the commission to their office, for the purpose of proceeding to the said office and to the performance of his duties when he was stopped by the sentinels; and when he informed them that he was a member of the military commission they still refused to let him pass and he therefore turned back.

There being no business before the commission it adjourned to meet on Monday, January 13, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., January 13, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present.

The accused, William Hearst, also present.

The proceedings of January 10 and 11 were read over to the commission by the judge-advocate.

THOMAS E. MOTHERSHEAD, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, residence, and occupation.

Answer. Thomas E. Mothershead; live within eight miles of Hillsborough, western part of Jefferson County, Mo.; a farmer.

Question. Do you know me, and how long have you known me?

Answer. We were boys raised together, and I am thirty-two years old. We lived within one and a half miles of each other until we were married.

Question. Have you any knowledge of my enlistment as a soldier in the army of Jeff. Thompson, and if so, when and where did the enlistment occur?

Answer. I have some knowledge of it. I was in Bloomfield, Stoddard County, Mo., and went down to the camp of Colonel Lowe’s regiment, in Jeff. Thompson’s {p.290} army, and there I saw William Hearst and several others whom I knew, and Hearst told me that he was going to enlist and asked me to go up with him. We went up together to the headquarters of Colonel Lowe, and there Colonel Lowe swore him in as a private soldier in my presence. I saw him after that several times in the company to which he belonged.

Question. State the reputation as a citizen I have hitherto enjoyed, and also any knowledge you may have of the influences brought to bear upon me to induce me to go into the rebellion.

Answer. He was a citizen of Jefferson County, a farmer, peaceable as any man you could pick out down there; reputation as good and honest as any man in the country. I have seen William Hearst there frequently in county; and there were some men in the home guards at De Soto who did not like Hearst, and would report that he (Hearst) had been drilling there for the purpose of whipping the home guard, and through their influence and action he became satisfied that his life was in danger if he stayed there. He thought so and so expressed himself to me. He told me that was the cause of his going down to the army, and he said after he got down there that if he thought the men of the home guard would not pester or molest him he would go back home and stay there, and would have nothing to do with Jeff. Thompson’s army. We had frequent conversations on the subject before he left and he always expressed these sentiments. He was a man that would rather do anything else than leave home; always talked in that way-that is, that he would not leave home unless afeared of persecution by some men of the home guard. One of these men was a cousin of Hearst’s, and had been hired by him as a farm hand, and he would not work unless William Hearst was with him, and William discharged him, and he consequently became an enemy.

Question. Were you in Jefferson County at the time the bridge over Big River was burned?

Answer. No, sir; I was not.

Question. Have you any knowledge of the fight at Big River bridge or at Blackwell Station on or about October 16, 1861, and whether the burning of said bridge by Jeff. Thompson and his men was necessary to effect their escape or not?

Answer. I have no knowledge of the fight or of the burning of the bridge except from hearsay.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Do you know the names of the officers in command or the name of the regiment in which the accused enlisted at Bloomfield?

Answer. I know some of them. The captain’s name was White, and the first lieutenant’s name was Whittaker Martin. It was a cavalry company attached to Colonel Lowe’s regiment, under Jeff. Thompson.

Question. What was the date of the enlistment of the accused?

Answer. I think it was between the middle and the last of September, 1861.

Question. You say that the accused, William Hearst, had been reported by some men of the home guard at De Soto as drilling men to whip the home guard; do you know whether this accusation was true or false?

Answer. It was false to my personal knowledge. I know he never did; he could not do it.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the evidence he had given was read to him by the judge-advocate and the witness dismissed.

The examination by the defense was here closed. The accused then presented his written defense, appended to these proceedings and marked A, which was read to the commission by the judge-advocate.

{p.291}

The commission was then cleared for deliberation, and having maturely weighed and considered the evidence adduced find the accused, William Hearst, of Jefferson County, Mo., as follows:

Of the specification, guilty.

Of the charge, guilty.

And the commission does therefore sentence the said William Hearst, of Jefferson County, Mo., to be shot to death.

S. D. STURGIS, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army. RICH’D D. CUTTS, Colonel, U. S. Army, and Judge-Advocate.

The commission then adjourned to meet to-morrow, Tuesday, January 14, 1862, at 10 a.m.

The commission having thus performed the painful duty of awarding punishment in conformity to the laws of war and to General Orders, No. 32, 1861, which deprived them of all discretionary power, beg leave to recommend the case of William Hearst to the merciful consideration of the confirming authority.

The members of the commission engaged in the trial have reason to believe that the prisoner is an unusually stupid and ignorant man, and not capable of discriminating between the lawful commands of a superior officer and those that are criminal that he enlisted in the rebel ranks more from unfounded fear of his neighbors than from any deep-seated feeling of disloyalty, and that he voluntarily delivered himself up as a prisoner when he could have escaped arrest.

S. D. STURGIS, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army. RICH’D D. CUTTS, Colonel, U. S. Army, and Judge-Advocate. JOHN SCOTT, Lieutenant-Colonel Third Iowa Infantry. E. W. CHAMBERLAIN, Major First Iowa Cavalry.

EXHIBIT A.

Being illiterate I was made the dupe of bad men who have hitherto borne such a good name in my neighborhood that I was led to place confidence in them. I never entertained a thought of overthrowing the Government, but went to Thompson’s army through fear of Federal troops whom I was induced to believe were coming upon me and my neighbors with fire and the sword to commit an indiscriminate slaughter. I was told and believed that the Federal troops were usurping authority and destroying the guarantees of the Constitution. Thus misled I went to Jeff. Thompson’s rebel army, who I believed were fighting for the Constitution against usurpation of the President.

The evidence shows that I there enlisted in a company organized as I understood by authority of the laws of the State of Missouri. Being regularly mustered into the said army I became subject to the orders of the officers of the company and battalion. We were ordered to march up to the Big River bridge. We were told that the destruction of that bridge was a military necessity, and were ordered by our officers under the penalties inflicted by military law for disobedience of orders to destroy the bridge. I felt it was wrong at the time, and hesitated. The bridge was fired by others not by myself The statements of the {p.292} witness Wilson are untrue. He was present at the burning of the bridge and was as active as any of the men of Thompson, and as much rejoiced at our success. A confrere and associate of the leading secessionists in Jefferson County before that time, his hesitancy and refusal to answer as to his membership of the order of Knights of the Golden Circle must be satisfactory to the court of his complicity with the schemes of the rebellion and the wicked purposes of his statements. The evidence shows how I returned to my home as soon as I found that I could do so and as soon as it was shown to my understanding how greatly I had been duped.

The proof shows that I returned and offered to comply with the provisions of the ordinance of the Missouri State convention to obtain the amnesty there offered. This I was prevented from doing by my arrest and imprisonment. I did hesitate to go voluntarily and surrender myself; I knew the fearful punishment which the members of the order of the Knights of the Golden Circle were sworn to visit upon a deserter from the rebel army and I therefore requested Mr. Bates and sent for Colonel Lawson to send and have me arrested.

In good faith I laid down my arms, relying upon the amnesty promised by the convention and which I am informed the President of the United States has recognized and agreed to respect. I have been humbugged into the folly and crime of rebellion. I saw the deception practiced upon me, and felt the folly and crime I had been guilty of. I sought to return to my allegiance. I was assured of safety in so doing. I would not have been taken had I not desired it. The proof shows this. My hands bear no stains of blood. I was never in a battle. All that I did was in a regular manner of regular warfare. If I am not permitted to return to my allegiance under the provisions of the ordinance of the convention I am still entitled to the treatment of a prisoner of war. This I do not desire as I do not wish to be exchanged. I submit my fate to this commission. If the punishment I have endured be not sufficient for unintentional crime I have been guilty of toward my country I am willing to endure more. What I may not ask of the justice of the commission I may entreat of its mercy that I may be permitted to return to my allegiance my home and my family, and by future loyalty and devotion to the Constitution and Union of the United States endeavor to atone for the error of the past.

WILLIAM HEARST.

The finding and sentence are approved; but in consideration of the recommendation of the members of the commission, on account of the general ignorance and stupidity of the prisoner the sentence is mitigated to confinement in the military prison during the war.

H. W. HALLECK, Major. General.

–––

Trial of Col. Ebenezer Magoffin, accused of murder and violation of parole.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 6, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission* met pursuant to adjournment

Present as follows: Brig. Gen. David S. Stanley, U. S. Army; Col. R. D. Cutts, of the staff; Lieut. Col. John Scott, Third Iowa Volunteers.

{p.293}

The accused, Col. Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

Capt. Lewis [Louis H.] Marshall, Tenth U. S. Infantry, being present [in pursuance of an omitted order of General Halleck] the judge-advocate asked the accused if he had any objection to Captain Marshall being a member of the commission, to which he replied he had not. Capt. Lewis Marshall, Tenth U. S. Infantry, was then duly sworn by the judge-advocate in the presence of the accused.

The accused then presented his plea to the jurisdiction of the commission for the offense set forth in the specification under charge 1, which plea was read to the commission by the counsel for the accused, and will be found attached (marked A) to these proceedings.

The commission was then cleared for deliberation, and after duly weighing the argument and reasons adduced the doors were reopened and the president announced the decision of the commission to be adverse to the plea of jurisdiction as urged by the accused.

The accused was then arraigned upon the following charges and specifications, which were read aloud to the commission by the judge-advocate:

CHARGE 1: Killing in violation of the laws of war.

Specification-In this, that he, Ebenezer Magoffin, of Pettis County, Mo., not being a legitimate belligerent did wantonly and maliciously kill and murder George W. Glasgow, a sergeant in Company C, First Illinois Cavalry, and a soldier in the service of the United States by shooting him with a ball from a gun or pistol. This at Georgetown, Pettis County, Mo., on or about the 1st day of September, 1861.

CHARGE 2: Violation of parole.

Specification-In this, that he, Ebenezer Magoffin, of Pettis County, Mo., said to be an officer in the rebel army, having on or about the 10th day of December, 1861, given his parole of honor not to resume arms against the Government of the United States and having in consideration therefor received a safeguard dated December 10, 1861, did violate said parole of honor. This at or near Milford, Johnson County, Mo., on or about the 18th day of December, 1861, where and when said Magoffin was captured in arms and in league with the enemies to said Government of the United States.

The judge-advocate then addressed the accused as follows: “You have heard the charges preferred against you; how say you, guilty or not guilty?”

To which he pleaded as follows:

To the specification, first charge, not guilty.

To the first charge, not guilty.

To the specification, second charge, not guilty.

To the second charge, not guilty.

Lieut. Col. B. B. BROWN, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State your name and rank.

Answer. E. B. Brown; lieutenant-colonel of the Seventh Regiment of Missouri Volunteers.

Question. Are you acquainted with the accused?

Answer. I am.

Question. Have you within the last two months had any business with the accused in your official capacity as an officer in the U. S. service? And if so state what that business was.

Answer. On or about the 6th day of December, 1861, I was stationed at Sedalia, Pettis County, Mo. At that time it was reported that the accused was in the vicinity of his residence, about twelve miles distant from Sedalia, making an effort to see his wife, who was dangerously ill. It was also reported that he was desirous {p.294} of visiting her under the protection of the United States Government. At the intercession of friends of the Government, who were also friends of the accused, Col. Fred. Steele, of the Eighth Iowa, acting brigadier-general of the U. S. troops stationed at that post, ordered me to meet the accused at some point to be agreed upon and offer him a safeguard that would permit him to visit his family without molestation. In accordance with that order I met the accused at the residence of Col. James R. Hughes on or about the 10th day of December. In the interview, which lasted about half an hour, I agreed with him upon the terms under which he could meet his family and remain with them for a limited period, he giving me his verbal parole of honor that during that time he would commit no act against the Government of the United States or communicate any information he should come in possession of. I went with him to his own house, and after remaining there about an hour I left with him a written safeguard under the agreement previously made at the residence of Colonel Hughes. The safeguard was written in the usual form, and essentially as follows:

“A safeguard is granted to Col. E. Magoffin, protecting him in person and property until the 20th day of December, 1861. Officers and soldiers of the U. S. Army will obey this order, and in no way molest him or his family.”

It was signed by order of Col. F. Steele, commanding post at Sedalia, with my name and rank as acting aide to General Steele. My regular duties were as commissary and quartermaster of the Fifth Division of the Army of the Missouri. I had no conversation at that time with the accused after he entered his house. On December 15, 1861, it was reported to Colonel Steele that the accused desired an extension of his safeguard, and as the command was ordered to move on that day toward the Osage River, and would not probably return before the 20th, he ordered me to leave another safeguard with Colonel Hughes, to be by him delivered to the accused if he chose to accept it. A copy of that safeguard or the original was sent some time after to headquarters of the department. On the night of December 19, 1861, a large number of prisoners were brought into camp at Clear Creek, about nine miles east of Warrensburg. Those prisoners were delivered into my charge, and amongst them was the accused. I was not personally present when the prisoners were taken. They were delivered to my charge by order of General Pope, as being a body of men or soldiers of the Southern Confederacy taken in arms at Milford on the afternoon of that day. The next day the command moved toward Sedalia the accused being with me most of the time, and he remained at Sedalia after the command arrived on his parole given by me and by order of Colonel Steele until the body of prisoners was sent to Saint Louis. When I met the accused first at Clear Creek on the morning following the capture I expressed my surprise to find him there and away from his home. He answered: “I have returned the safeguard with a letter of explanation. I was convinced there would be an attempt made to assassinate me and that my life was not safe at my own house.” He said that he was not in arms; that he was traveling with the body of men who had been captured for his own protection. At numerous times while we were together he reiterated the same sentiments, but acknowledged that he was among the prisoners and was at Milford at the time of the fight between our troops and the enemy. I asked him why he did not give notice to the commander of the post at Sedalia of his apprehensions of being assassinated, and either ask for a guard to protect him at his own house or come within the lines at Sedalia for protection. He replied that there seemed to be an unaccountable bitterness of feeling toward him and that he would not feel safe so long as he remained in that part of Missouri. The safeguards and paroles were given and received under the supposition that the accused was an officer in the army of General Sterling Price, which the accused claimed and acknowledged himself to be, although claiming no command at Milford when taken.

Question. In your statements you allude to two safeguards written for the accused on December 10 and December 15, 1861; were they both written by you, and were they identical in terms and language?

Answer. They were both written by me, but were not identical in language though they were in general terms. The last safeguard said it was given by order of General Halleck. The first did not cite General Halleck’s authority. The last safeguard was unlimited in duration.

Question. In the safeguard left by you with the accused on or about December 10 was there any prohibition in the safeguard or statement to the same effect against the taking up of arms or communicating with the enemy on the part of the accused?

Answer. It expressed in general terms that the accused should receive the protection of the United States Government so long as he remained a loyal citizen. It was {p.295} written in ink amid much distress in the family. There was but one piece of paper to be found in the house and that small, and the safeguard was necessarily expressed in few words. I do not recollect the exact language used.

Question. In your statement you say that on the 15th of December you were directed by Col. F. Steele to leave another safeguard in case the accused should determine to accept it. Do I understand you to say that the parole was given and the first safeguard delivered to the accused with a view merely to allow him to visit his family; or was it with the understanding that he was to become and remain a loyal citizen?

Answer. When I met him at the residence of Colonel Hughes on the night of December 10, 1861, I said to him that I had been ordered by the commanding officer at Sedalia to offer him the protection of the Government, so that he could visit his family and remain at home if he chose to do so. I also stated that Colonel Steele had been advised that such was the wish of the accused. The accused replied: “I wish to see my wife; and as I have been exposed to the weather, sleeping out on the prairie at night, I am not in a condition to think intelligibly, as my mind is so harassed, and I wish ten or fifteen days to give an answer” (it was in answer to a proposition for a permanent safeguard), and that in the meantime he would give a decision. I then told him that I would give him the safeguard for the limited time he wished, and took his parole. At the time of the giving of the first safeguard the accused was not viewed in the light of a prisoner of war further than the giving of the safeguard and the receiving of the parole would constructively make him so; that he would be at liberty at the time the safeguard expired to leave his home and place himself in the same position as before I met him-that is, as an enemy. The proposition to the accused to visit his family was volunteered by the Government.

Question. Would you recognize the safeguard last written by you if shown to you?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Is this the safeguard? (Showing paper, marked B, and attached to these proceedings.)

Answer. Yes, sir; this safeguard was written on the 15th, but dated back to the 10th, at the time when I received the parole. The object of so doing was to correct any supposed imperfections that might have existed in the first.

By the ACCUSED.

Question. How far is Hughes’ residence from the home of the accused? Answer. About ten miles, I should judge.

Question. Was the safeguard, the first one, written at Hughes’ or after you and the accused went to his house?

Answer. After I went to the house of the accused.

Question. Did you give the paper to the accused in person after you wrote it?

Answer. I did not. I went to his room to give it to him, and he was holding his wife in his arms, who was supposed to be dying. I handed it to a member of his family-his daughter, I think. It was given in accordance with the agreement made at Colonel Hughes’ house.

Question. Have you ever seen the first safeguard since you wrote it, and are you sure that anything was written in that paper about loyalty to the United States?

Answer. I have not seen it since I wrote it, and I have only a general recollection of its terms, and am not positive whether the word loyalty to the United States was used. I think it was.

Question. In the conversation you have already recited between you and the accused at Clear Creek, and afterward elsewhere, was anything said by the accused about the insufficiency of the safeguard to protect his property from the depredations of the soldiers of the United States? If so, state what it was to the best of your recollection.

{p.296}

Answer. There was no conversation that expressed an insufficiency of the safeguard. He stated that an officer who had been there with a small command, and to whom was presented the first safeguard that I left at his residence, doubted its validity when first shown to him, but afterward obeyed it By validity I mean genuineness. I do not know who the officer was. I staid at the house of Colonel Hughes the night of the 10th and until after breakfast on the morning of the 11th; and when on my return to Sedalia in company with Colonel Hughes I learned that there was a body of soldiers at the house of the accused who had ordered breakfast and refused to recognize the safeguard, I immediately turned back for the purpose if ascertaining in relation to it; and when within about a mile of the accused’s residence I met a man who I believe was a member of the family of the accused who told me that the officer and soldiers had left and had recognized the authority of the safeguard. I then turned back and pursued my journey.

Question. Did you not in your official capacity learn that the property of the accused was destroyed by the U. S. soldiers and his hogs slaughtered by them in spite of the safeguard?

Answer. I did not.

Question. In the last safeguard written by you you use the words in reference to the accused, “Ebenezer Magoffin, formerly a colonel in the Southern Confederacy.” What were the words in reference to the accused in the first?

Answer. I do not recollect.

Question. How long have you been stationed at or near Sedalia?

Answer. Since November 17, 1861.

Question. State to the court how long you have known the accused, what have been your means of knowing his character and what that character is.

Answer. I met the accused once la August last, previous to December 10, 1861. I have known him by reputation particularly since the middle of July, 1861. I was in command of the U. S. troops at Jefferson City and on the line of the Pacific Railroad west. In July and August of that year heard very often of the accused as being an active enemy of the Government and general reputation of being a bad man. I had opportunities during that time and during the time I was stationed at Sedalia this winter of learning more of his character. I have never been able to learn of any act of a marauding character or that was different from that pursued by other enemies of the Government in that part of the country during the time. His reputation among Union men in Pettis County is that previous to the present war he was known as a high-toned, honorable gentleman.

Question. Are you able to state whether there did exist in the part of Missouri around Sedalia a bitter hostility against the accused?

Answer. There is-among the less intelligent of the loyal home guards.

Lieutenant-Colonel FISCHER, a member of the commission, made his appearance during the session, and as soon as possible after he was notified of the fact; but not having heard the earlier part of the witnesses’ testimony and not being consequently qualified to vote or act in the present trial he was excused from being present.

The commission adjourned to meet to-morrow, Friday, February 7, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 7, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment.

Present: Brig. Gen. David S. Stanley, U. S. Army; Col. R. D. Cutts, of the staff; Lieut. Col. Job a Scott, Third Iowa Volunteers; Capt. Lewis Marshall, Tenth Infantry, U. S. Army.

{p.297}

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of yesterday were being read by the judge-advocate, when by the assent of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with.

The examination of the witness, Col. E. B. BROWN, was resumed.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Was or was not the accused regarded and treated by the officers of the United States in command at Sedalia and at other posts in Missouri as a belligerent of the grade of colonel in the ranks of the enemy?

Answer. He was.

Question. Had you any reason to doubt the status thus assigned to him?

Answer. I had not.

Question. Had you or had you not official information that the accused was in the battle of Carthage in arms against the U. S. forces in the capacity of aide to the governor of the State, Claiborne [F.] Jackson; that he afterward raised a regiment in the counties of Saline and Pettis, in this State, in virtue of a commission as colonel, under the proclamation of Jackson, or of his major-general, Sterling Price?

Answer. No information on the subject, official or otherwise.

Question. Where were you stationed at the time of the battle of Carthage?

Answer. Jefferson City, Mo., which is sixty-four miles from Sedalia.

Question. What portion of this State did the home guards which you have referred to as bitterly hostile to the accused occupy?

Answer. I know of it only in the vicinity of Sedalia.

Question. How far is it from Sedalia to Clear Creek? and how far from Sedalia to Warrensburg? How far from the residence of the accused is Clear Creek?

Answer. Sedalia to Clear Creek, twenty-six miles; Sedalia to Warrensburg, thirty-five miles; residence of accused to Clear Creek, I do not know the distance certain-I think about twenty-five miles.

Question. Did you or did you not at Otterville, in this State, in your capacity of an officer of the United States treat with the accused? If your answer be in the affirmative, state the capacity in which the accused was recognized by you and the general character of the treaty you made with him.

Answer. I did treat with him. He was recognized by me as a private citizen. I was at Otterville with my command about the 14th of August, 1861, where I met a committee of seven gentlemen, of whom the accused was one, sent for the purpose of making a treaty from a camp about twelve miles north of that place who the committee alleged were banded together in a private capacity for the purpose of protecting themselves against marauding bands of home guards and other parties claiming to be soldiers. The treaty was not as one between two belligerent parties. The committee disclaimed any wish, desire or intention of taking up arms against the Government of the United States and agreed to disband and go to their homes upon the issuing of orders preventing soldiers without any show of authority from arresting private citizens or taking their property. I issued the orders, sent about 1,000 copies to the camp from which the committee was sent and moved my command back to Jefferson City, Immediately on receipt of the orders the camp was broken up.

{p.298}

Question. Had you ever seen the last safeguard sent by you to the accused from the time you sent it up to the period when it was shown to you yesterday by the judge-advocate?

Answer. I saw it with a letter that was directed to Colonel Hughes in which the safeguard was inclosed when returned.

Question. In whose hands were the safeguard and letter when shown to you, and when and where?

Answer. In the hands of Colonel Steele at Sedalia, about December 23, 1861.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. How far and in what direction is the house of the accused from Milford where he was taken prisoner?

Answer. I should think about fifteen miles, and the direction about northeast.

Question. Will you state whether within your knowledge there was any application direct or indirect on the part of those speaking for the accused or in his name to obtain for him a safeguard on giving his parole.

Answer. There was a direct application at Sedalia and at his residence. I do not know whether it was authorized by the accused or not.

Question. Was there no hostility toward the accused on the part of the intelligent loyal home guards, or was not that hostility general among all loyal citizens and soldiers?

Answer. There seemed to he a marked personal interest and friendship on the part of the intelligent loyal citizens and home guards for the accused, but strongly condemned his course in connecting himself with the enemies of the Government.

Question. Do you know or have you reason to believe that the hostility of the loyal home guards or of any other soldier or citizen would lead them to rob or maltreat the accused whether he had or had not a safeguard?

Answer. I have no reason to believe that they would. I never heard him threatened by any body or person.

Question. Do you know of your own knowledge that the accused was a colonel in the service of General Price or of the Confederate States, or only from hearsay?

Answer. Only from hearsay. I do not know of my own personal knowledge.

Question. State the date when the treaty was made with the committee of seven gentlemen and whether or not the accused informed you that he was a private gentleman or an officer in the service of General Price, or of the Confederate States.

Answer. On or about the 14th of August, 1861. I had no conversation with the accused at the meeting of the committee referred to. Maj. James B. Harris was the organ of the committee; and through him and in the presence of the entire committee I learned that the parties in the camp referred to did not wish to be considered in any other light than private citizens.

Question. Had you any conversation with the accused about August 14, 1861, in reference to his being a private gentleman and not an officer in arms against the United States?

Answer. I did not.

By the COMMISSION:

Question. In your interview with the accused was there anything said concerning the accused returning the safeguard should he change his intention of remaining at home?

Answer. There was not.

{p.299}

Question. At the interview with the accused was anything said or agreed upon as to the accused reporting himself to the commander of the district or post, and if so was any time or place designated?

Answer. There was a conversation relative to his meeting the commander of the post for the purpose of making an arrangement by which he could remain at home hut no time or place agreed upon. Two days afterward I saw the accused at his house and he said that he would prefer not to go to the post for the purpose of the interview referred to, alleging as a reason that there was a bitter feeling against him and he feared that he would be subject to violence-at any rate to being annoyed.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. At that interview (the first) did the accused see or read or have read to him the first safeguard before you left his house?

Answer. He did not.

Question. You say there was something said in the first interview about the accused going to the commander of the post; where was that-at Hughes’ house or at the residence of the accused?

Answer. At the house of Colonel Hughes.

Question. Did the accused at any time, either at the first interview or the second, abandon his expressed desire to take time of ten to fifteen days to consider what he would ultimately do as to remaining at home?

Answer. He did not. I had no conversation with him in relation to that subject except at the first interview.

Question. At the second interview what seemed to be the condition of the mind of the accused? I mean as compared with its condition when you first met him.

Answer. I could make no comparison, as in the second interview the deep affliction he was in seemed to absent all other feeling as he was at the funeral of his wife.

There being no further questions to ask the witness the testimony he had given was read to him and lie then requested permission to add as follows:

In the first interview at the residence of Colonel Hughes his mind was so much distracted that he was unable to keep up a connected conversation, and so evident was the distress under which he was laboring that I was impressed with the idea that he was bordering on insanity and so expressed myself to Colonel Hughes.

JAMES R. HUGHES, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State your name and rank.

Answer. James R. Hughes.

Question. Are you acquainted with the accused?

Answer. I am.

Question. Do you or do you not know anything in regard to the reported giving of a parole by the accused? and if so state the time, its terms and circumstances connected therewith.

Answer. I do. On the 9th day of December, 1861, I went to Sedalia to see if I could not get a parole for Mr. Magoffin, and after I had reached Sedalia I saw Colonel Brown and represented to him that I had been a practicing physician of Mrs. Magoffin. I told him that her case was a very critical one and that I very much desired that Colonel Magoffin should be enabled to get a parole; that I believed his wife would die; and represented the case in as humane light as I could-as I was justified in doing-that he might be with her. After holding said interview with Colonel Brown he immediately went to General Steele. General Steele and {p.300} Colonel Brown returned to me and I related the same circumstances to General Steele that I had to Colonel Brown. General Steele’s reply to me was that if I could communicate with Mr. Magoffin and find out if Mr. Magoffin would consent to an interview with him that he would give him a safe conduct in and a safe conduct out if they did not come to terms. I returned from Sedalia through Georgetown, requested Mr. Ira Barnes to go to Mr. Hutchison, the father-in-law of Mr. Magoffin, and for him (Ira Barnes) and Mr. Hutchison to meet me at my house as soon as they could, which they did about 3 o’clock in the afternoon. I related to them the interview between General Steele, Colonel Brown and myself and requested Mr. Hutchison if he could communicate with Mr. Magoffin that I believed that General Steele would grant him terms to return to his wife that would be perfectly satisfactory to himself. Mr. Hutchison told me that he could and that he would and let me know during that night. About 1 or 2 o’clock that night Mr. Hutchison came to my house and told me that Mr. Magoffin had consented to an interview with General Steele. I suggested that Mr. Magoffin should come to my house before daylight and that I would report the designated place of meeting as being at my house. Mr. Magoffin arrived at my house before daylight that morning. On that morning about daylight I started back to Sedalia to communicate with General Steele. After I told him that Mr. Magoffin was desirous of said interview General Steele then remarked to me that he would have to telegraph to General Halleck to know if he could give him a parole without taking the oath. I had told him that Mr. Magoffin would not take the oath; had not told him so that morning but previously. I waited at Sedalia during that entire day with a great deal of impatience, and I suppose it was about sundown when I called upon General Steele for the last time. He told me that he had not received any satisfactory answer to his dispatches. He had forwarded several that day so he told me. I urged upon him the necessity that if anything was done it must be done immediately. General Steele went into his office and handed me a piece of paper which he told me would give Mr. Magoffin the privilege of going home and of being protected. I did not read the paper. I immediately asked Colonel Brown to accompany me to my house which he readily consented to do. I then told General Steele that Colonel Brown was going with me. General Steele then authorized Colonel Brown to give Mr. Magoffin a parole or safe conduct or whatever it was, and at which time I handed back to General Steele the paper he bad previously handed me. Colonel Brown and myself immediately ordered Colonel Brown’s buggy and went immediately out to my house at which place we found Mr. Magoffin. I took Colonel Brown up to the room in which Mr. Magoffin was and I immediately withdrew, staying away from the room as long as I believed it was necessary for them to come to an understanding. I then returned to the room, anxious that Mr. Magoffin should be at home as soon as possible with his wife; but they had not touched upon the question at all. As soon as I discovered that I started to withdraw again and Colonel Brown called me back. Colonel Brown then addressed Mr. Magoffin and asked him what it was he desired-that is as well as I can recollect. Mr. Magoffin replied he wished the privilege to go to the sick-bed of his wife in safety. Colonel Brown asked him for what length of time he desired to remain at home as well as I can recollect. Mr. Magoffin replied ten or twenty days; that within that time the condition of his wife would be terminated one way or the other. Colonel Brown replied that he should be privileged to do so. I suggested myself right then the point to Mr. Magoffin to take a perpetual parole or conduct or whatever you may call it-(upon explanation) I mean a safeguard. Mr. Magoffin replied that he was not in a condition of mind to determine upon that matter, and asked if he could have that privilege within the time of determining whether he would make it perpetual or not. Colonel Brown promptly responded yes. I immediately suggested that I did not wish to lose any time and told Mr. Magoffin to get read and we would take him over to his house, which we did between the hours of 10 and 1 o’clock at night of the 10th. After we reached Mr. Magoffin’s house we found Mrs. Magoffin in a dying condition. Mr. Magoffin was at her bedside. Colonel Brown and myself were not disposed to disturb him. Colonel Brown called for pen, ink and paper and wrote the safeguard without Mr. Magoffin’s knowledge. The safeguard was a promise of protection of person and I believe property to Mr. Magoffin until the 20th of the month. After Colonel Brown and myself had remained there an hour or more he (Colonel Brown) handed me the safeguard and I handed it to Mrs. Isaac Hutchison. Mr. Magoffin’s sister-in-law. I told her of the importance of the paper and at a proper time for her to hand it to Mr. Magoffin; and shortly afterward we left and went to my house arriving there some time between 1 and 4 o’clock in the morning. I do not know whether Mr. Magoffin ever saw the paper or not; but I took it for granted that he had. This occurred on Monday night, the 9th of December, but I don’t know whether it was before or after 12 o’clock at night. Colonel Brown and myself arrived at my house about 10 or 10.30 p.m.; remained there not less than one hour and then started for Mr. Magoffin’s house, distant about three or three and a quarter miles. We were in a two-horse buggy; suppose it took {p.301} us half an hour to travel the distance. Can’t tell exactly how long I was in the house before the safeguard was written. On the Saturday afterward (December 14) I received a verbal message from Mr. Magoffin desiring to see me and on that evening I rode out to his house. I was then at Sedalia. I saw Mr. Magoffin out at his hog-pen in company with Mr. Hardin. After I had been there some little time Mr. Magoffin told me that he desired permission to accept of his perpetual parole or safeguard or whatever else it was,-for he and I considered it a continuation of the same that he had already received,-and asked me if I would obtain it for him. He told me that he did not consider himself safe in his present position; that troops had passed through his place that day and had killed a number of his hogs. I told him that I could get it for him. I returned to Sedalia that evening and reported to Colonel Brown and General Steele what Mr. Magoffin desired. The next morning quite early Colonel Brown handed me the perpetual parole, safeguard or whatever you may call it just on-the eve of starting upon the Milford expedition. After they had started I made an effort to get a pass for myself from the provost-marshal which was refused me on the ground that orders had been issued that no person should be permitted to pass out of the lines. I then made a second application and told him that my business was with Mr. Magoffin, stating its character. He then ordered a guard to take me through the lines. I went directly to my own house, took tea and afterward rode over to Mr. Magoffin’s. Mr. Magoffin was sent for and I told him that I had his parole, safeguard or whatever it may be and I showed it to him, and he asked me to read it and I did so. He and I discussed the conditions that were imposed upon him by that. He asked me the question that if any of his relations or friends that had been engaged in Price’s army were to come to his house about mealtime could he allow them to eat. My reply was, “Do as I would do under just such circumstances-give them their dinner,” tell them he had given his parole and he would not be troubled with them any farther. After talking in general terms we separated and I went home leaving the paper with him.

The hour of 3 o’clock having arrived, the commission adjourned until to-morrow, Saturday, February 8, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 8, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present except Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of yesterday were being read by the judge-advocate when by assent of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with.

The examination of the witness, JAMES R. HUGHES, was resumed.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Would you recognize the paper you allude to were you to see it?

Answer. I think I should.

Question. Is this the paper? (Showing the witness the paper marked B attached to these proceedings.)

Answer. Yes, sir; this is it.

Question. Did you or did you not have any conversation with or make any application to Colonel Steele or other officer of the United States in regard to giving a permit to the accused to visit his family or to stay at home before the 9th day of December, 1861? and if so state the character of the application.

Answer. I did not to General Steele in person but did have the conversation with and did make the application to Colonel Brown. I told Colonel Brown several days before the 9th that Mrs. Magoffin had requested me to see the authorities there at Sedalia if he could not return home and remain there in quiet and safety.

{p.302}

Question. Had you any authority direct or indirect from the accused authorizing or approving of such application in the first interview you had with Colonel Brown on the subject?

Answer. Upon a return visit of mine from north Missouri I called at Mr. Magoffin’s to see his wife and I found Mr. Magoffin in there. Just before I left his house I took him out and had a conversation with him; told him of his wife’s condition and asked him if I could make any arrangements for his return would he do so? He told me that he would. There was nothing said as to the terms that I recollect of. The exact date of this conversation I do not recollect; it might have been two weeks or might have been four weeks before the 9th of December. The week preceding the 9th as well as I recollect I had another interview with Mr. Magoffin and told him that I did not believe he could get a parole or other paper heretofore alluded to without taking the oath of allegiance which I insisted upon his doing. After some little lapse of silence on Mr. Magoffin’s part he told me he could not take the oath.

Question. Did he at either of the above interviews express any desire or authorize you to apply for a permit or parole to see his family or remain for any length of time at home?

Answer. I think that in the last interview that he expressed himself that he would like to get a parole without taking the oath. That conversation did occur. I impressed upon him that he could not get a parole without taking the oath and he expressed some anxiety to receive the parole without the oath he and I believing right then that the matter was ended; but being at Sedalia on the 9th and still hearing of the sinking condition of his wife on my own responsibility I brought the matter up before Colonel Brown again.

Question. After your conversation with the accused on the 15th of December, 1861, did you have anything further to do in connection with the safeguard?

Answer. On the 18th of the month as well as I can recollect I received a letter from Mr. Magoffin with that paper inclosed. The letter was dated on the 16th as well as I can recollect, it having been delayed two days-one day at my house and one day at Mr. Hutchison’s. If the letter was dated on the 17th I received it on the 19th, as there were certainly two days’ interval between its date and receipt.

Question. Is this the letter you allude to? (Showing him paper marked C and attached to these proceedings.)

Answer. This is the letter. The letter and paper remained in my possession from the 18th until the Sunday morning afterward, the 22d. The reason why I did not return them was that General Turner was in command of the post and I thought it right and proper that I should hand them to General Steele. I returned them on the Sunday alluded to to Colonel Brown.

(See paper marked C.)

A notice having been served on the accused to produce the first safeguard given to him by Colonel Brown the accused stated that it was not in his possession. (See paper marked D attached to these proceedings.)

By the ACCUSED:

Question. What was the state of mind of accused at the interview between him, Colonel Brown and yourself?

Answer. He appeared to me to be a man who was not entirely himself and I attributed it to want of rest and distress on account of the condition of his family.

Question. Have you in your evidence thus far given stated all that was said or done by accused at the interview at your house between him and Colonel Brown touching the arrangement made there by which accused was to go home and see his wife?

Answer. No; I have not stated all but all the important features that I can recollect, except that when I made the proposition for him to accept of his perpetual parole he put his hand up to his forehead and stated that he was not in a condition of mind to determine that matter; that everything appeared confused to him.

{p.303}

Question. At that interview what if anything did the accused promise or pledge himself to do?

Answer. I could not say that he promised anything; I do not recollect that be did.

Question. You say that in going upstairs to the room in which Colonel Brown and accused were you found that they had not touched the matter of arrangement. How did you find out that fact?

Answer. They were talking upon other matters.

Question. After you, Colonel Brown and accused started for the house of accused and after the arrival of all at his home was there any conversation on the subject of the arrangement or its terms before the safeguard was written by Colonel Magoffin?

Answer. Not within my knowledge.

Question. Was anything said at your house by Colonel Brown or yourself as to the propriety or impropriety of making stipulations with the accused on account of the perturbed condition of his mind?

Answer. Not that I remember.

Question. Have you no recollection of being told by Colonel Brown that he considered the accused as on the verge of insanity?

Answer. After we had left Mr. Magoffin’s house on our return to my house Colonel Brown told me that he believed that Colonel Magoffin’s mind was seriously threatened.

Question. Was or was not the main object of the interview at your house to make an arrangement by which the accused could have the privilege to see his wife then supposed to be in extremis?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. After Colonel Brown and the accused did take up the matter of the arrangement were you present during the whole of the interview till the arrangement was made?

Answer. I am under that impression for the reason that the first question was on the part of Colonel Brown: “Well, Mr. Magoffin, what is it that you want?” Mr. Magoffin’s reply was to be privileged to return home to see his wife.

Question. Why did Colonel Brown and you go with Magoffin to his house?

Answer. It was known there were some scouts in that neighborhood and that Mr. Magoffin could not in all probability get to his house without we accompanied him. It was known to Colonel Brown and myself.

Question. Where and when was the privilege granted to the accused by Colonel Brown to go to his wife?

Answer. It was granted verbally at my home before 12 o’clock on Monday night, the 5th.

Question. State all who went from your house to Magoffin’s that night with the accused, and how they went.

Answer. The driver (George), Colonel Brown, Colonel Magoffin and myself.

Question. Was or was it not the object of Colonel Brown in thus going to insure the safe conduct of the accused to his home?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Have you no recollection of the accused entering into terms at your house with Colonel Brown that he would not for a limited period take up arms against the United States or give information to the enemy?

Answer. The mere fact of my understanding that such would be the case, that I don’t remember that it was spoken of. I took it for granted that that was the understanding; otherwise I would not have had anything to do with it.

{p.304}

Question. You say that at the hog-pen on Saturday accused said he desired to accept a perpetual parole. Did he state on what terms or conditions he would take it?

Answer. The conversation there at the hog-pen commenced by his telling me that the condition of his family was such that it was a necessity for him to remain at home; but that as to any requirement on the part of the Government from him I do not remember that anything was said.

Question. Did or did not the accused in that context say that he would be glad that you would get one for him so that he might examine it, or words to that effect?

Answer. I do not remember that he did.

Question. Was Mr. Hardin present at the conversation?

Answer. He was.

Question. In that conversation was there anything said by accused of his willingness to take the oath of allegiance to the Government of the United States?

Answer. No, sir; not that I remember.

Question. When you brought the paper to the accused next day and he asked you to read it to him you say a discussion arose as to its nature and effect. How did that discussion result?

Answer. It was entirely as I remember upon how he should treat his returned friends and relations and after my explanation he made no response.

Question. Did he read the paper himself while you were there or did he have it in his hands before you left?

Answer. He did not read it while I was there. After I had finished reading it he or myself laid it on the mantel. It was upon the mantel and I remember telling him that it might fall in the fire. He then took it off the mantel and I never saw it afterward until I received it inclosed in his letter at Sedalia.

Question. In that conversation at the hog-pen or in that the next day when you brought to him the paper was there anything said by the accused or yourself about the expiration of the ten days he had asked to think of the matter?

Answer. No; not that I remember.

Question. State to the commission the character of the accused and your means of knowing what that character is.

Answer. I have known Mr. Magoffin for four years personally and previously to that time for a number of years from character. My personal knowledge of him is that of a perfect gentleman. I have never heard directly or indirectly any personal charges made against him or intimations; and as to his friendship I believe he would have suffered martyrdom rather than have knowingly placed me in a delicate position in the matter.

Question. You have spoken of the condition of mind of the accused at the time the arrangement was made at your house with Colonel Brown and have said he was then not entirely himself. Do you know what view the accused had of that arrangement? Confine yourself in your answer to the period before he was charged with breaking his parole.

(The above question being objected to by a member of the commission the room was cleared for deliberation, and when the door was reopened the president announced the decision of the commission to be that the question should not be put.)

Question. Was or was it not distinctly agreed at your house by Colonel Brown that the accused was to have ten days to determine what he would ultimately do with the Government of the United States in the way of arrangement? If your answer be in the affirmative say whether {p.305} at any time after that within the limit of ten days did you ever hear the accused say that he abandoned or waived that right in any of the negotiations you had with him.

Answer. Yes; it was agreed. To the second question he did not.

Question. State to the commission the contents of the paper written by Colonel Brown at the house of the accused on the night of the 9th of December as accurately as you can give them.

Answer. I read that paper but once and as well as I recollect it promised Mr. Magoffin protection in person and property and imposed upon him an obligation not to give aid or comfort to the enemy and not to take up arms against the Government, and to extend until the 20th of the month. I think it was signed by General Steele, commanding officer, by Colonel Brown.

Question. How did that paper impose any obligation upon the accused?

Answer. Only by its face.

Question. This paper carried by you to the accused (the last safeguard) says: “Whereas Ebenezer-Magoffin, formerly a colonel in the army of the Southern Confederacy, has given his parole of honor that he will not in any manner by word or deed aid, assist or give countenance to the enemies of the United States.” Do you know whether accused had given such parole? If so where did he give it and to whom?

Answer. I do not know of his having given such parole unless by his acceptance of the safeguard be the giving of a parole.

(The above reply being objected to by the accused the commission cleared the room for deliberation, and when the door was reopened the president announced the decision of the commission to be that the reply should be recorded with the words “As I considered it” stricken out.)

Question. Do you know whether or not there existed in and around Sedalia about that time a bitter personal hostility against the accused entertained by the home guard or soldiers of the U. S. forces?

Answer. I can’t say just at that time; but previous there was and I would not suppose that it had died out.

It being 3 p.m. the commission adjourned to meet on Monday, February 10, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 10, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of Saturday, February 8, were being read by the judge-advocate when at the suggestion of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with on the ground that the entire day’s proceedings, the testimony of the witness, James R. Hughes, would during the morning be read to him and to the commission.

The examination of JAMES R. HUGHES was resumed.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Do you know whether the accused was commissioned as a colonel in Price’s army, or raised a regiment, or in any capacity acted as an officer belonging to that army? If so state what you know

{p.306}

Answer. I do not know that he was commissioned but I saw him at the head of some 70 or 100 men in Pettis County and they called him major. I saw the recruits go to his house day by day for several days either in July or August of last year. It may have been earlier. I have heard some of his own men since that time call him colonel.

Question. Do you know whether the accused was at the battle of Carthage and whether he there acted as an aide to the then governor, Claiborne F. Jackson?

Answer. I do not know that he was at the battle of Carthage from any other source than from the accused who told me on his return that he was there. I do not know that he was aide to Claiborne F. Jackson.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. In your reply to question No. 8 of the accused you express your assent that the main object of the interview at your house was to make an arrangement by which the accused could have privilege to see his wife, then supposed to be in extremis. Was or was it not previously understood what would be the character of the arrangement? And was or was not the meeting held merely with a view to carry out that arrangement?

(To the last question the prisoner opposes the objection that it was leading, and he submits that as the commission has already decided that the accused cannot on cross-examination ask a leading question surely the judge-advocate cannot ask his own witness a leading question. The commission being cleared for deliberation and the objection to the last question being duly weighed by the commission the door was reopened and the president announced the decision of the commission to be that the question should stand with the addition “Was or was it not previously,” &c.)

Answer. In my interview with Mr. Hutchison and Mr. Barnes I sent word by Mr. Hutchison that I had no doubt that Mr. Magoffin could by giving his parole get to return home and see his wife; but there was nothing that passed between Mr. Magoffin and myself until the meeting at the hog-pen.

Question. In your reply to question 14 of the accused you say that the mere fact of your understanding that such would be the case-that is that the accused was not to take up arms against the Government or give information to the enemy within the ten days-that you do not remember that that matter was spoken of. During the time that you were present at that interview between Colonel Brown and the accused did you hear or did you not all the conversation, or was there any time when you were not paying attention to it?

Answer. I heard it all I think. From the interest I felt in the interview I heard it all of course.

There being no further questions to ask the witness the testimony he had given was read to him by the judge-advocate, and before retiring he requested permission to add to his answer to question 24, by the accused, the following: “Not until I received his letter” (marked C).

The witness was here dismissed.

The judge-advocate then introduced an attested extract (marked E and attached to the proceedings) from the report of General John Pope to the headquarters of the Department of the Missouri in regard to the operations of the army under his command previous to and at the time of the surrender of Colonel Robertson and his command at or near Milford, as evidence to show the date of said surrender; that the accused was one of the prisoners taken at said surrender; and that the said command was in armed opposition to the United States Government.

{p.307}

The accused objected to the introduction of the above-mentioned extract as evidence for the reasons he stated in a paper he presents (marked F), which is attached to these proceedings. The commission being cleared for deliberation the reasons stated by the accused were duly weighed, the door reopened and the president announced the decision of the commission to be that so far as the extract referred to the point mentioned by the judge-advocate it was evidence and should be admitted as such.

WILLIAM SATTERWHITE, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State your name, age, occupation and, residence.

Answer. William Satterwhite is my name; age 23; clerk in a grocery in Georgetown; residence is in Georgetown, Pettis County, Mo.

Question. Have you any knowledge of any disturbance that occurred in Georgetown in which a soldier or soldiers in the U. S. service were wounded or killed? And if so state all you know about it.

Answer. I remember a disturbance occurring at Georgetown-some time about the latter part-of August 1 think it was. I went to the door from hearing some noise in the street-did not know what it was-and saw three U. S. soldiers on horseback just coming around the corner; and I looked across the street and saw Mr. Magoffin standing right beside his horse-or was walking to his horse, I am not certain; but he was near his horse. I saw him raise his gun to his face and heard the report, and saw it pointed in the direction of the soldiers at the place the soldiers had got to at that time. I then turned and went in the house and just as I got in the house-or a second or two after I got in the house-I heard the report of another gun when I came back to the door, but I don’t know how long I was in the house. I saw a man in the act of falling off his horse; a negro was helping him off his horse. He keeled over to one side before the negro touched him. I went over then as soon as I shut my door, and went across the street. It was somewhere near fifty yards from my door to the spot where the man was taken off his horse. When I got there he had been taken in the wagon-makers shop and I did not get to see him. I then went from there up the street to old man Jackson’s and there I found the doctor working with another man who was wounded-his name was Wheat who was wounded-and after leaving there I went home and got a pitcher of ice-water and took it back to him, and then from there I came down to the house where this man was taken off his horse and they told me there he was dead. I did not get into the house or get to see him at all. I do not remember anything else that I did or saw, as by that time the whole streets were crowded with men on horseback-some our own citizens, some U. S. soldiers and some home guards. Do not know whether the men who were wounded were the men who came around the corner. The man who died there or whom I saw falling off his horse was dressed in uniform as other soldiers. The man who was wounded had his clothes off or down, and the doctor was working with him. The man was wounded in the back. There was such a crowd and I was in such a hurry that I could not tell exactly. I did not see the wound at that time, and indeed I don’t know that I ever did see it although I sat up with him several nights. I was so sick when the wound was dressed I had to leave the house; or if I staid in the home I did not look at the wound. The man lived and was there over two weeks perhaps three weeks, and might have been longer, and left Georgetown. It was about two weeks it was necessary to sit up with him at night, when he got well enough to walk about the room before he left. The man wore soldier’s clothes when he got well enough to walk about.

Question. Had you known the accused and had you seen him often?

Answer. I had known him at that time some eighteen months and had seen him two or three times a month.

Question. How far were you off from the accused when you saw him with his gun in hand?

Answer. I suppose I was about thirty or thirty-five yards.

{p.308}

Question. State in what direction were the three soldiers coming when you saw the accused point his gun at them.

Answer. They were coming sort of toward him. They were coming from an eastern direction and he was on the south side of the street.

Question. Were the soldiers in the public street and at what rate were they moving?

Answer. They were in the main street and in a pretty fast lope.

Question. Was the accused in front of them when he fired or on the side of the street?

Answer. He was on the side of the street and not directly in front of them.

Question. How far off the main street was the accused standing?

Answer. Somewhere from ten to twenty feet as well as I recollect.

Question. If the soldiers had continued their ride up the main street would the accused have been in the way?

Answer. No, sir; he would not have been in their way at all.

Question. Was the accused standing alone?

Answer. I do not remember seeing any person else by him.

Question. Were there any citizens or other persons about the street in the immediate vicinity of where the accused stood when he fired?

Answer. There were a good many citizens-about fifteen-standing around the store and in front of the street when I came to the door. I do not know how many or whether there were any opposite the street where the accused was.

Question. Did you hear any report of fire-arms before the first one heard by you as mentioned in your statement?

Answer. No, sir; I did not.

Question. How was the accused dressed?

Answer. Ho was dressed in common citizens’ clothes; had on no soldiers’ clothes; nothing particular about his dress; no badges or rosettes; I did not see any.

Question. When you saw the accused raise his gun and point it at the soldiers did you see any smoke or the flash?

Answer. I can’t say whether I saw any smoke or not. I just heard the report and supposed it was no other gun but his.

Question. Are you quite certain that the report came from the gun in the hands of the accused?

Answer. Well, I can’t say that I know it did hut I can’t say where else it came from.

Question. Was the accused standing openly on the side of the street or was any attempt at concealment made?

Answer. He was standing openly in the street; no attempt at concealment.

Question. Before the time of the shooting were there any rebel soldiers in the street or town or armed bodies about?

Answer. I did not see any armed bodies about but there were some eight or ten men in our store wanting to get some buckshot. They were dressed in citizens’ clothes and could not tell what they were.

Question. Did you see the accused at any time that day before you saw him with his gun pointed?

Answer. I do not think I did.

Question. At about what time of the day did the occurrence alluded to take place?

{p.309}

Answer. It was in the afternoon; can’t recollect exactly; but could not have been long after 12 o’clock.

Question. What became of the body of the man whom you saw helped from his horse by the negro?

Answer. I never saw the man after he was taken off his horse by the negro. I was taken away an hour or two afterward to Sedalia.

Question. Describe the gun the accused had in his hand if in your power.

Answer. I can’t do it. I just saw it was a gun; looked like a common-sized gun not a musket; can’t say whether it was a shot-gun or a rifle; whether it was a single-barrel or double-barrel gun.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. What sort of a grocery was that and in what capacity were you acting there?

Answer. We had at that time tobacco, whisky, cigars and some little hardware. I was clerk there.

Question. Will you describe the relative positions of the accused and the three soldiers on horseback when you first saw them?

(He makes a diagram to show the positions of the parties. Marked G and attached to these proceedings.)

The hour of 3 p.m. having arrived adjourned until to-morrow, February 11, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 11, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of yesterday were being read to the commission by the judge-advocate when at the suggestion of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with on the ground that the testimony would be read to the witness some time during the morning.

The examination of the witness, WILLIAM SATTERWHITE, was resumed.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Were the three soldiers on horseback armed? If so state how armed.

Answer. I do not remember whether they had sabers or not. I did not notice particularly what they had.

Question. State whether or not the three mounted soldiers were followed by other mounted soldiers. If so state how many.

Answer. I did not see any at that time.

Question. At the time of the first fire observed by you had the mounted soldiers passed your door?

Answer. No, sir; they had not.

Question. When you saw the gun raised state whether you did or did not immediately go back into the grocery from the fright?

Answer. I did not go into the grocery until I heard the report. I then went into the grocery to get out of the way for fear they should shoot me.

{p.310}

Question. State whether or not before accused raised his gun some person or persons in the crowd did not cry out to accused that the cavalry or soldiers were after him?

Answer. I did not hear it if they did.

Question. Can you give us no idea of the character of the noise or disturbance which caused you to go to the door?

Answer. I cannot, sir. I don’t know what caused me to go to the door.

Question. You say the street was at a certain time filled with soldiers and citizens. State whether the soldiers were on horseback; and were they armed?

Answer. Yes, sir; they were; and were on horseback, and had sabers I know, and pistols I think.

Question. Did you see any soldier fall or reel in his saddle at the first fire?

Answer. No; I did not at the first fire.

Question. Do you know who fired the second time?

Answer. I do not.

Question. When you went to the door after hearing a second report of fire-arms did or did you not see a considerable number of soldiers on horseback galloping up the street?

Answer. I don’t know whether I saw any at that time or not-the second time I went to the door.

Question. Where did the mounted soldiers you saw in numbers come from-up the street, down the street or from across the street or elsewhere?

Answer. I don’t know where they came from; they were all up around me before I knew where they came from.

Question. State whether or not the town of Georgetown was surrounded that day before the time of the shooting of which you have spoken by a large cavalry force of the United States for the purpose of capturing the accused?

Answer. If it was I did not know anything about it.

Question. Did you or did you not hear more than two reports of firearms during the disturbance?

Answer. I do not remember of hearing more than two.

Question. Do you know whether in point of fact the accused was taken prisoner at that time in Georgetown by the forces of the United States?

Answer. I saw him on horseback after that on the same day going with the troops to Sedalia.

Question. How long was this after the occurrence you have related?

Answer. I do not remember how long it was; it was not a great while; it was not sundown; it was in the afternoon some time.

Question. How far is Kidd’s hotel from your grocery and is it in sight of your grocery?

Answer. It is in sight of our grocery, and is something over 100 yards from grocery on the south side of the street.

Question. Did you not see a crowd of soldiers around that hotel shortly after the firing?

Answer. I did.

{p.311}

Question. How soon after the events you have related was it that you were taken, and where were you kept till carried off for Sedalia, and by whom were you taken?

Answer. I don’t know exactly how long it was; it might have been half an hour or it might have been an hour. Was kept on a horse. Soldiers came to the grocery and took me and carried me in back of Kidd’s Hotel by the alley east of the hotel.

Question. What were you taken for?

Answer. Taken for a witness I suppose. I don’t know what I was taken for.

Question. Could you see what was going on at the hotel from the place they kept you at? If not were you in hearing distance?

Answer. No, sir; after they took me there they immediately took me out on another street where I could not see the hotel. I was at hearing distance at a still time but owing to the noise in the street I could not hear anything at that distance.

Question. Did you or did you not know that the accused was then in the hotel and that it was surrounded by the U. S. forces for his capture?

Answer. I did not know where he was. I did not know that the soldiers were there for that purpose but supposed so, as heard some one say they were hunting for the man who shot at the soldier.

Question. State if you know whether or not the accused with a portion of his force was at that time engaged in getting up clothing and provisions in the neighborhood of Georgetown for Price’s army.

Answer. I don’t know anything about it if he was.

Question. The men who asked for buckshot at your grocery that day before the disturbance, were they or were they not some of the men of the accused?

Answer. I don’t know whose men they were.

Question. Did you know them?

Answer. I did not.

Question. Did they get the buckshot; and if not why?

Answer. No, sir; I don’t think we had any in the house at that time.

Question. How many soldiers do you suppose you saw that day in Georgetown?

Answer. I suppose there were over fifty; there might have been a hundred; I don’t know. I have not much idea of crowds especially at such times.

Question. Before that day were there any U. S. cavalry stationed at Georgetown?

Answer. No, sir; I think not.

Question. Had you or not seen the accused in or about Georgetown for some time previous to that day? State how long.

Answer. I do not know how long it was before that day I had seen him. He might have been there without my seeing him.

Question. When and where were you released after you were taken into custody, and were you at any time informed why you were taken?

Answer. They took me to Sedalia and kept me there that night, and I went with them the next day on the road from Sedalia to Lexington and encamped with them that night and then the next morning they released me and I returned home. They told me they wanted me for a witness.

Question. Where was the accused then and what became of him?

Answer. I don’t know where he was; I did not see him.

{p.312}

Question. Were there any threats uttered against you after your arrest and before your release in relation to your testimony? If so state what they were and by whom made.

Answer. If there were any threats against me I never heard them.

Question. Have you not stated that threats were made by those who held you in custody as to your giving evidence?

Answer. No, sir; I have not.

Question. At any time since your release have or have not some of the home guard made threats to you concerning the giving of your testimony?

Answer. I do not remember any threats being made against me or anything about it.

Question. Can you state whether any of the home guard about Georgetown have threatened the life of the accused?

Answer. I can’t say whether I ever heard any of them threaten his life. I have heard them talk about him a good deal, but whether they ever threatened his life or not I don’t know. I don’t remember what they did say.

There being no farther questions to ask the witness, the testimony he had given was read to him by the judge-advocate, and after the reading was finished the witness requested that his testimony might be explained and corrected in the following particulars:

In his reply to question 21 by the accused he wishes to add:

I did not know at that time that I was wanted for a witness but was told so afterward.

In his reply to question 17 of the judge-advocate he wishes to add:

That the men who were in there I supposed to be Magoffin’s soldiers but I did not know whether they were or not; they did not say that they were.

The witness was then dismissed.

JAMES H. HUGHES, a witness for the prosecution, was recalled.

Question. Do you or do you not know anything in regard to a disturbance that occurred at Georgetown, Pettis County, Mo., in which a soldier or soldiers of the United States was or were killed?

Answer. I was not in Georgetown that day but at Sedalia. I saw Mr. Magoffin when he was brought in by some of Colonel Marshall’s men. I know nothing of the killing.

Question. Had you or had you not any conversation on or about that time with the accused on the subject of the death of one or more soldiers in the U. S. service who were reported to have been killed in Georgetown about that time?

Answer. Yes, sir; I had. Well, sir, Mr. Magoffin being a friend and neighbor of mine as soon as I heard he was arrested I sought from Colonel Marshall H permit to visit Colonel Magoffin, giving as my reasons I wished to take home any message or have arranged any business he might desire. He gave me the permission and accompanied me in person. Mr. Magoffin in that interview told me of the shooting at Georgetown; how he came there; what he came for and then the difficulty that arose afterward-and told me that if he had not believed that they were home guards he would not have surrendered himself. I had another interview at Lexington to the same effect, and our interviews were always in the presence of officers and our conversation was restrained.

Question. What did he say about the shooting?

{p.313}

Answer. I don’t know that he said anything he taking it for granted I knew of it and that he would not have shot the two several times on that occasion if he had not supposed they were home guards. He certainly said he shot twice-either at that interview or some subsequent interview.

Question. Did the accused tell you that he shot twice at that interview or some subsequent one?

Answer. I could not say which.

Question. Did the accused say anything at either interview about the effect of his shot?

Answer. Not that I remember.

Question. Will you state the date of the two interviews?

Answer. Somewhere about the latter part of August, if the surrender of Lexington was on the 19th of September.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. What did the accused say he went to Georgetown for that day?

Answer. He went after a pair of shoes or boots and tobacco.

Question. Did he say whether the boots and tobacco were for himself or for his men?

Answer. If I remember right it was for a pair of boots or shoes for Charlie Hardin, his son-in-law.

Question. In the interview or interviews of which you have spoken state whether the accused did or did not say that he shot because he believed his own life was in danger.

Answer. Yes, sir; every time the matter was spoken of he would make that declaration.

Question. Did or did not the accused speak of the violence of the home guard toward him and do you not know that they had threatened his life?

Answer. Yes, sir; he did; and without being able to specify any particular person I know his life was threatened by them.

Question. State if you know whether a U. S. cavalry force was dispatched that morning to Georgetown to surprise and capture the accused and his men.

Answer. I know that there was a detachment of U. S. cavalry to go to Georgetown but do not know to capture whom.

Question. Do you know of Captain Montgomery, of the home guard, going to the house of the accused with a party of armed men? If so state what you know of it.

Answer. I know of Captain Montgomery’s men headed by Captain Cook going to Mr. Magoffin’s house in search of Mr. Magoffin. This was at least two or three weeks before the transaction at Georgetown. They were what are called home guards, and were armed all of them. There were somewhere between 300 and 500 in number, and Lieutenant-Colonel Grover was with them, who was also of the home guards as I understood it at the time. They examined the house, kitchen, pantries and smoke-house and negro cabins. I was there and just looked on.

Question. Did you hear any firing or know of any depredations committed?

Answer. I heard no firing that I remember, and saw no depredations.

Question. Did you or did you not hear Captain Cook, the commander of the expedition, say anything about depredations there committed by his men? If so state what.

{p.314}

Answer. I heard him state that he had gone to Mr. Magoffin’s smoke-house and found it almost empty, and he had examined the premises generally and was astonished to find that Mr. Magoffin was so poor a man, and that he (Cook) did not take any meat but that he had publicly and officially declared the entire property of the accused confiscated. That was all the damages I know. He gave as his reasons for not taking bread and meat there that there was not more than enough left for his family.

Question. Did Captain Cook state the object of the expedition to the house of the accused and the design in going in so large a force? If so state.

Answer. He told me it was for the purpose of arresting Mr. Magoffin and his company. He told me this the day before.

Question. Did the accused at either of the interviews speak of his capture and of terms and conditions of his surrender at Kidd’s Hotel? If so state what he said.

Answer. I cannot state whether it was Mr. Magoffin or who told me that he had delivered himself up as a prisoner of war. Mr. Magoffin may have told me so or it may have been some of the others.

Question. Do you know who commanded the detachment of cavalry sent to Georgetown the day of the shooting?

Answer. I understood it was Lieutenant-Colonel Day.

Question. Did the accused in either of the interviews you have referred to say why his course would have been different at Georgetown if he had known the force to have been U. S. soldiers?

Answer. Yes, sir; that with U. S. soldiers he would have felt himself safe. I told him at Lexington that one of the men that was wounded would recover and he seemed immensely delighted.

Question. State if you know whether at and before the transaction at Georgetown the accused was or not engaged with his company in procuring supplies and clothing for the army of Price?

Answer. I know that he was recruiting men but whether he was getting arms or supplies I do not know.

By the COMMISSION:

Question. Did any of the home guard in that vicinity or county wear the uniform of soldiers at the time of that transaction?

Answer. I cannot tell whether it was before or after; afterward they were in uniform but my impression is that they were not in uniform; they had tents and arms but I think ununiformed. I am satisfied they were not in uniform.

Question. Were the troops you met in Sedalia all in uniform?

Answer. Yes, sir; except a portion of the home guard. Marshall’s cavalry were in uniform, and Grover’s company who were with them were not in uniform.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Do you know whether the accused had been for two months in camp on Blackwater, and whether he had been for some time before the affair at Georgetown away from that part of the country-that is away from Georgetown?

Answer. I know of no encampment on Blackwater. I know of an encampment at Heath Creek on his place. I think he was away; my memory serves me that. I know he was away. I learned he was in Cooper County.

Question. Do you know whether the accused had an opportunity of knowing about the time of the Georgetown affair and about ten days before it whether the home guard were uniformed or not?

Answer. I do not know, sir.

{p.315}

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the testimony he had given was read over to him by the judge-advocate and he was dismissed.

The hour of 3 o’clock having arrived the commission adjourned until to-morrow morning, Wednesday, February 12, 1862, at 10 o’clock.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 12, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of yesterday, Tuesday, were being read to the commission by the judge-advocate when at the suggestion of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with for the reason that the entire day’s proceedings, being the testimony of William Satterwhite and James B. Hughes, were read over yesterday to the witness by the judge-advocate.

JOSEPH SIMPSON, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State your name, occupation and where you reside.

Answer. Joseph Simpson; was a merchant; and reside at Buncombe, Pettis County, Mo.

Question. Have you or have you not any knowledge of a disturbance that occurred at Georgetown, Pettis County, in which a soldier or soldiers in the service of the United States were killed? and if so state what you know about it.

Answer. Yes, sir. Well, I was in there (Georgetown) when it occurred. I seen it. Well, I saw him shoot a man and he died instantly afterward. That is all I know or believe.

Question. Are you acquainted with the accused, Ebenezer Magoffin; and if so have you seen him often before?

Answer. No, sir; I saw him when it occurred. I don’t know him. Had not seen him often before. I saw him when this ’ere act was at Georgetown.

Question. Had you ever seen the accused before “this ’ere act was at Georgetown”?

Answer. I don’t know as ever I did so.

Question. Who was the person whom you saw shoot a man at Georgetown?

Answer. It was Magoffin.

Question. Where were you when you saw the shooting done?

Answer. I was in McClure’s I believe; well, as I was out at the door.

Question. How far were you off at that time?

Answer. Well, I suppose I was about forty steps off. It was all up there at the drug store that it all occurred.

Question. Did you see the accused have a gun in his hand and did you see him fire it?

Answer. Yes, sir; I did.

Question. Describe all that you saw at the time of the firing.

Answer. Well, I don’t know anything else but what is down; well, I saw him shoot.

{p.316}

Question. In what direction and at whom was the gun fired?

Answer. It was right toward the drug store. He was shot-well, it was about fifteen steps off there-well, six or eight; I don’t recollect.

Question. How was the man dressed whom you saw the accused shoot?

Answer. Well, he looked like he was an officer. I don’t know him; he was a United States man anyhow.

Question. How was the accused dressed?

Answer. Well, he had on a broad hat-a wool hat I believe-and an old shotgun; I don’t know whether it was old or not, it looked old. His clothes were on the ordinary order you know; just as if he was at home you know; I don’t know but what he was. He was on the plain order.

Question. Did you hear the report of the gun?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you hear any additional report or reports of guns?

Answer. No, sir; only but one as I have any idea.

Question. Did you see the gun pointed in the direction of anyone? and if so state at whom.

Answer. Yes, sir; this ’ere man. I don’t know any of them, only when I see ’em out you know; that is all I know.

Question. Did you see the accused and recognize him as the man who shot after the shooting on that day?

Answer. Yes, sir; I saw him afterward and he was the same man who shot.

Question. Did you see the man who was shot fall, and was he on foot or on horseback?

Answer. Yes, sir; he was on his horse when he was shot; he was right opposite the drug store. Yes, I did see him fall from his horse.

Question. Do you know the name of that man?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Did you see him after he was shot? and if so say what you saw.

Answer. I saw him when he was dying.

Question. Did you see him after his death?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. State the date when this transaction occurred?

Answer. I don’t know that; it was some time in the fall but I don’t know the day.

Question. Describe the dress of the man who was shot?

Answer. He was very something on the order of the man there (pointing to an officer present and a member of the commission). Well, he was dressed in uniform you know.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. You say you are a merchant; what kind of a merchant? Have you ever been engaged in any other kind of business? If aye what business?

Answer. I opened a dry goods store in old Kentucky; well, I did not open any out here. Not been engaged in any other business; just been at home all the time.

Question. What is your present business?

Answer. Well, I own a small farm is all.

{p.317}

Question. How long have you lived in Buncombe, and where did you live before your residence there?

Answer. Well, I have been about two months there. In old Kentucky I lived before my residence there. I lived or was staying at old Jackson Quisenberry’s, in Pettis County. I am a man of family.

Question. Where is McClure’s-on what street? Main or cross street?

Answer. Well, I don’t know; it is on Main street I believe. If I was going west McClure is on the right-hand side. The drug store is on the cross street.

Question. Had you been inside of McClure’s? If so what caused you to come out and what was the first thing that attracted your attention?

Answer. Yes, I had been in. Well, I saw this army in-all the U. S. Army-and was out because I wanted to look at them.

Question. Did the army come in before you came out at the door?

Answer. No, sir; after I was out they were in. Just as I came out the army came in. Saw them when I came out.

Question. Was the army on horseback or on foot? Was the army moving fast or slow?

Answer. They were ahorseback; they looked like they was moving on, galloping.

Question. Were they armed or unarmed?

Answer. Yes, sir; they were armed. I don’t know but what they had swords; whether they had muskets I don’t know. They had swords.

Question. Did the army all come in by the same road or street or by several streets? Was the town surrounded by the army?

Answer. They came in on all sides. The town was surrounded by the army-I don’t know but what it was.

Question. How many of the army were there when you saw the gun fired?

Answer. Well, I don’t know; there was a good many of them in there.

Question. Were any persons near the man who was shot at the time of the shooting? If any how many and who were they?

Answer. I don’t know any of them. There were others looking on. I don’t know how many there were of them. The soldiers were all round there everywhere at the time he was shot.

Question. At the time the gun fired were the backs of the soldiers to you or their faces?

Answer. I was on the side of them.

Question. Were the soldiers at the time of the fire in Main street or in the street on which the drug store stands?

Answer. Well, they were all over it; every which way.

Question. Were the soldiers galloping toward the accused at the time the man was shot?

Answer. No, sir; the soldiers passed on, you know; and as they passed on he shot. Not all had passed on.

Question. When the gun was fired did the man fall from his horse?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did he fall in Main street or in the street on which the drug store stands?

{p.318}

Answer. He fell off in about six or eight steps from the drug store on the street where the drug store stands in the direction of Main street, or nearer Main street than immediately in front of the drug store.

Question. When the gun fired was the side face or back of the man who shot toward you?

Answer. His face was toward the drug store. The gun was pointed in the direction of the drug store.

Question. How far was the accused at the time he shot from the drug store?

Answer. He was about fifteen or eighteen steps off, east of the drug store.

Question. Was the horse of the accused hitched; and if so to what fence?

Answer. I think he was astanding and holding of his horse, about six or eight steps from the fence of the court-house square.

Question. At the time of the shooting was any person near the accused? If any how many?

Answer. Well, I don’t know; they were standing off about fifteen steps, or over it; don’t know how many there was. Well, there was maybe 200 of then for what I know. There was a crowd of soldiers.

Question. Did you see the wound? If so in what part of the man was it?

Answer. Yes, I looked at him. He had a wound on the arm, left arm, and in the neck. I saw some holes in his arm; could not tell whether shot or bullets; saw some two or three in the arm and one by the ear.

Question. Did you hear more than one report of arms about the time of the shooting?

Answer. No, sir; that was all I heard.

Question. Before the fire did you hear any person or persons cry out to the accused that the soldiers were upon him or words to that effect?

Answer. No, sir

Question. Had you been drinking that day?

Answer. No; I reckon I had a horn in me; one was all that I had any idea of.

Question. You say you saw the accused after the fire; where was he when you saw him?

Answer. Well, the army searched and found him. I do not know but that it was in Kidd’s Inn. I did not see him until after the army got him in Kidd’s Inn.

Question. If you know anything about the surrender of the accused that day at Kidd’s Hotel state all you know about it.

Answer. I don’t know anything of it. I saw the army go up after him was all.

Question. You said that you did not know Magoffin before the shooting. Did not some one tell you that Magoffin was the man who shot and was not that your only knowledge that it was Magoffin who shot?

Answer. No; I saw him. I did not know it was the accused until some one told me so; only I think he is the one. I saw him on the same evening afterward.

Question. Did you or not hear the home guard about Georgetown on that day or at any other time make threats against the life of the accused?

Answer. I heard the U. S. Army make threats against him-that was when it was all over though.

{p.319}

Question. Was the gun you saw fired a rifle or shotgun, single or double-barreled?

Answer. Shotgun, double-barreled.

Question. Had the army passed the grocery where you stood when you came out?

Answer. They came in every which way.

Question. Do you know Satterwhite who keeps the grocery? Did you see him at the door at the time of the fire?

Answer. Yes, sir; I did see him at the door at the time of the fire.

Question. Are you certain that the accused fired but once?

Answer. That’s all, sir, that I have any idea of; all that I seen.

Question. Were you looking at the person who shot the soldier before the shot?

Answer. I looked at him when he shot; don’t know that I looked at him before. I was just alooking about; saw him raise the gun up before he fired. He was down aholding of his horse.

Question. If the accused had fired twice is there any reason that you know of that would have prevented you from hearing it?

Answer. No, sir; I don’t know any reason.

Question. You say you heard no other report of firearms that day. Did you see any other firearms around there that day? If so state what and who had them.

Answer. The U. S. Army was in. I saw firearms, pistols and swords I believe in the hands of the U. S. soldiers. I reckon there were some six or eight who were not U. S. soldiers who had these old shotguns.

Question. Did the galloping of the army make much noise?

Answer. I don’t know, sir. They did not make much noise.

Question. Were there many persons in and about the grocery at the time of firing and were they drinking and noisy?

Answer. No, sir; only but few there and not drinking or noisy.

Question. When you were at McClure’s did you see some men buy buckshot from Satterwhite?

Answer. No, sir; not that I had any idea of; not that I recollect of anybody calling for buckshot.

Question. You say you were summoned as a witness. Were you called upon at Georgetown to look at the accused while he was a prisoner to see whether you could identify him as the man who shot?

Answer. Well, I don’t know as they called me to look at him, but I was summoned as a witness that I seen it you know-well, all this transaction.

Question. Summoned by whom to testify where-before what court or tribunal?

Answer. By U. S. Army. I believe it was Colonel Marshall. It was the Illinois. I was discharged without examination.

Question. Were the home guard about Georgetown or any of them dressed in uniform at that time?

Answer. I do not know, sir.

Question. Do you know the difference between the home guard and the soldiers of the United States?

Answer. No, sir; I don’t know. Well, they all wear about the one dress I believe.

{p.320}

Question. What was the color of the horse which the man held when he shot?

Answer. I don’t recollect the color of his horse.

Question. Did you see anyone help the man who was shot from his horse?

Answer. Well, I don’t know; there was a whole crowd around him; saw him fall off and seed him die. The horse on which the man was was going on at the time of the fire.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the testimony he had given was read to him by the judge-advocate and he was dismissed.

The commission adjourned to meet to-morrow, Thursday, February 13, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 13, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The judge-advocate having informed the commission that an important witness on the part of the United States was absent but would certainly arrive to-day the commission, in order that the prosecution might not be closed before the examination of said witness, adjourned until to-morrow, February 14, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 14, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of the 12th and 13th were read to the commission by the judge-advocate.

Lieut. Col. H. M. DAY, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State your name and rank.

Answer. Lieut. Col. H. M. Day, First Illinois Cavalry.

Question. Have you any knowledge of a disturbance that occurred at Georgetown, Pettis County, in which a soldier or soldiers of the U. S. volunteer forces and in the service of the United States Government were killed? If so state what you know.

Answer. I have, sir. By order of General Grant, commanding at Jefferson City, our regiment, commanded by Colonel Marshall, in connection with about 400 home guard, commanded by Colonel Grover, left Jefferson City on or about the 24th day of August, 1861, by order of General Grant; and having a list of what was supposed to be the principal rebels or secessionists on out line of march to Lexington I was in the habit of going ahead of the main body with an average of from 200 to 400 men for the purpose of surrounding and picketing the towns as we approached them. My reason for surrounding and picketing the towns and going in advance was to make arrests of the principal secessionists to be found in the town. We wanted to arrest them and hold them as hostages for the good behavior of the citizens of the place; also understanding there were no mails in that section of the country we were endeavoring to suppress any communication that might go in advance of us if possible. I left the main body of the command one morning about the 28th or 29th of August, 1861, with Company C, First Regiment Illinois Cavalry, composed of {p.321} about 95 men and about 125 home guards. When I arrived in about a half or three-quarters of a mile from Georgetown I divided a portion of my command with orders to surround and picket the town. I then proceeded on the main road, entering Georgetown with eight privates and one non-commissioned officer of the Illinois Cavalry and about sixty home guard. When we arrived within about half a mile of the court-house at Georgetown my orderly (his name was Glasgow) says to me, looking up the hill, “Colonel, there are some soldiers,” seeing what we supposed to be bayonets. I told him that I thought they must be Union troops. As we drew near I discovered that they were not. I supposed that they were not Union and was so convinced by their turning and running. They commenced running and we commenced running after them. Our horses being swifter than theirs we gained on them rapidly. As we ascended the hill going into town I was fully convinced that they were not Union troops or home guard from the fact that one of their number turned and tried to fire, but his gun did not go off. As we chased them along into town they ran through the town, while we were in full charge our horses being on the run. We were almost directly opposite the court-house, Georgetown; we were between the court-house and what I recollect was a frame two-story building to the best of my recollection occupied as a store below; the second story was approached by a stairs on the outside in the street next to the corner, which I think was used for offices, but not positive. Up to that time I had not heard the report of any gun. Just before we were turning that corner or at that building very near there-I am not positive as to the exact position-on the street that goes past Kidd’s Hotel, I heard the report of what appeared to me to be two guns, fired successively one after the other. At that instant I saw Orderly Glasgow, non-commissioned officer Illinois cavalry, reel in his saddle, jumped up like and reeled over to one side; did not go out of it. I checked my horse a trifle and ordered the nearest soldier to me to look after Glasgow as he was wounded, and that I would return directly. After I turned the corner there was a private by the name of Wheat who while my horse was slacking a little came riding past me and exclaimed: “Colonel, I am shot.” I made no reply. After I rode about ten rods several shots were exchanged. I fired two balls from my revolver at those men who were running. At that time I was not positive where the firing came from. Up to the time when I commenced there had been no firing except the two reports I have mentioned. The men who were mounted and whom we were chasing amounted to some fifteen or twenty men, perhaps more or less armed to the best of my knowledge with double-barreled shotguns. I am strongly of the impression that I saw two or three muskets with bayonets. When I got through to the other side of the town, the west side, I found that the home guard had all deserted me. I had five of my own men left with me-that I took with me. I halted then. There was one or two men come running to me, their names I do not know, and told me that firing was from the side of the street. At that moment I heard some firing that appeared to be north of the center of the town, which I was afterward informed by Captain Mitchell, Company C of our regiment, was aimed at him and at the men under his command with him that remained over after picketing the town. While I was conversing with these two men (citizens) Captain Mitchell reported to me that he had picketed the town. Acting upon information that I received there I ordered Captain Mitchell to draw in the pickets, surround the center of the town where from the information I got I supposed the firing was. After that had been done one of the home guard, whose name I knew quite well at that time but have forgotten it now, came to me leading a horse, saying, “That horse belonged to Magoffin.” That was the first information that I had had that he was in the immediate vicinity. From information derived from the citizens I was led to suppose that the two first guns that were fired when I was up by the courthouse were fired by Magoffin. I afterward ascertained that he was probably in Captain Kidd’s Hotel. I detailed a squad of men to search the building. They soon afterward returned from searching with a man said to be Magoffin, the accused. They reported to me that they had found him secreted in the garret of the hotel. When they brought him to me I was in the rear of the house-Kidd’s Hotel-in the alley. The first I asked him “was his name Magoffin,” and then demanded his arms if he had any. He either went and got a shotgun and one of Colt’s revolvers, or gave information where they were so that one of my men got them-I am not Positive which. I then asked him if he was a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the Missouri State Guard, or any connection with the so-called Southern Confederacy as an officer or private. He disclaimed any connection with either the Missouri State Guard or Southern Confederacy whatever. I then told him if that was the case that he was guilty of assassinating U. S. troops while in discharge of their duty. I then pinioned his arms; tied his hands behind him with a rope. During this time while they were getting the gun and pistol myself and officers protected him from the fury and rage of the home guard and some of my men who were determined to kill him. I then directed one of my officers to put him in charge of the guard on his own horse, or horse that I supposed to be his, and took up the {p.322} march for Sedalia where the main body of the command was. I delivered him to the officer of the guard there at Sedalia by the order of Colonel Marshall, my commanding officer.

Question. Have you stated all the conversation at the interview you speak of, or was there any other interview between yourself and the accused?

Answer. To the best of my recollection I have. There was some other conversation; it did not amount to anything. I gave him a little lecture; that’s about all. There was another interview between myself and the accused soon after he was put in the guard-house at Sedalia. I asked the officer of the guard if he had searched Magoffin to see if he had any weapons concealed about him. His reply was he had not supposing I had done it before I left Georgetown. I then went in the guardhouse and searched him myself. I asked him why he shot at us while we were running through the town not molesting him or any peaceable citizen. His reply was that he “was afraid that if he did not shoot us we would him.” We had some other conversation but nothing of importance that evening. I made some hard threats against him; talked very severe to him. The next morning after he had received a visit from his wife and daughter he admitted to me that he shot at me, or what he supposed to be the commander of the forces coming into town, but at the same time carried the idea that he was forced to do it to protect himself. He gave that as a reason for shooting. That was all the conversation that I recollect of having with him until after our arrival at Lexington.

Question. Do you recollect the christian name of Glasgow?

Answer. I do not recollect his christian name. I know that there was but one man of that name in Company C (Captain Mitchell).

Question. How was the accused dressed when you first saw him at Georgetown?

Answer. Well, sir, I could not see anything marked about his dress; he had no uniform on. I am positive that he had no uniform on or military badge; nothing to distinguish him from a citizen.

Question. Were the home guard in uniform or not?

Answer. Well, sir, they were not generally. Some had on caps and gray shirts that they got of our regiment-some of them from Johnson and some from Pettis County; I was so informed.

Question. Were the home guard of Georgetown or in that vicinity dressed in uniform or not at the time or previous to the occurrence at Georgetown?

Answer. The only home guard that I am personally acquainted with living nearer Georgetown than Sedalia had no uniform to distinguish them from a citizen. Captain Parke; of Sedalia, had a command of thirty or forty men who were mostly provided with caps or shirts or something to distinguish them from a citizen; but they were not with me at that time.

Question. How were the soldiers who accompanied you when you first passed through the town (Georgetown) dressed?

Answer. The soldiers were dressed with blue military caps such as were worn by U. S. troops at that time; gray shirts; some of them might have been red; high-topped or long-legged cavalry boots; sabers and belts; strap running over the shoulder and canteen slung over the shoulder; riding all of our men on Grimsley’s military saddles-brass trimmed and holsters.

Question. Were the soldiers of the U. S. easily and readily distinguished from the home guard by their dress?

Answer. They were, sir.

Question. Did or did not the accused admit to you at either of the interviews to which you allude that he killed the man Glasgow?

Answer. He did. He admitted that he did.

{p.323}

By the ACCUSED:

Question. You spoke of a search of the person of the accused by you at Sedalia after you had delivered him over by order of your command-big officer; what was the result of the search-did you find anything?

Answer. I found on his person an old knife-I think all the blades were broken out; a pocketbook containing some memorandums, a $5 note and 25 cents in silver; nothing else that I recollect of.

Question. Have you ever returned to the accused his pocketbook and contents?

Answer. I have not. I reported the amount to my commanding officer, Colonel Marshall-the amount I had taken, the pocketbook and its contents; showed him the knife. He told me to retain them. Afterward while on the march to Lexington he ordered me to pay $4 of that amount to a man whose name I forget whom he was about to send as a bearer of dispatches to General Grant or the commanding officer at Jefferson City. The balance I have in my hands now. The pocketbook and so on was lost with my baggage at Lexington.

Question. Are you not vindictively hostile in your feelings to the accused and have you not proclaimed to others and to him that you would “swear like hell against him,” or words to that effect?

Answer. I am particularly hostile toward him in my feelings. I don’t think I ever made use of that expression to him. I made use of very severe language to him at Sedalia. I don’t think that I ever used that expression. Recently and since I saw him at Sedalia and Lexington my feelings toward him have been different; not as bitter. Up to that time I had a spirit of personal revenge which since I have ceased to feel. The personal revenge grew out of this fact that from what I heard from him and others I supposed the shot that killed Glasgow was aimed at me; that I thought it a cowardly and assassin-like manner of treating me and so on. I made up my mind that everything was fair in war. Perhaps time has made a change and his deportment while with us before and after the surrender of Lexington continued to make that change of feeling; have not that vindictive feeling toward him that I had before.

Question. Were you a prisoner at Lexington? If so when the relation of yourself and accused were changed what was his treatment of you, and has that conduct had any effect upon your hostility to accused?

Answer. I was a prisoner at Lexington. His treatment of me was kind and had a tendency to soften my feelings of vindictiveness and revenge toward him.

Question. Have you not since the accused has been a prisoner here in this city in the McDowell College Prison uttered the words “I will swear like hell against you,” in the presence of the accused and Provost-Marshal Farrar?

Answer. I do not know that I ever had any conversation with the accused in the presence of the Provost-Marshal Farrar. I had, however, a conversation with the accused in McDowell’s College. While there in conversation with him and his associates I gave the accused and his associates some cigars. While in conversation with the accused in as I supposed a friendly manner, the question of charges being preferred against him, I in a jesting manner might have used some expression toward him something of that nature. I think I never made use of that particular expression.

Question. Describe where you first saw the troops whom you afterward chased.

Answer. We were approaching Georgetown from the east, in the direction of Otterville. The soldiers I first saw-those I took for soldiers-were on a hill opposite a brick house-farm-house I should judge it was-on the right-hand side as we approached Georgetown from the east. I should judge I was about half a mile from town, not more than half a mile; about half a mile from court-house. They ran down the hill in the direction of the town on the main road; they made two turns before they got to the court-house.

{p.324}

Question. How near them had you reached when you entered the town?

Answer. I should judge when we entered the town we had gained about half a mile on them. By the time we were opposite the court-house they were about thirty or forty rods ahead of us.

Question. Had any portion of your force been sent south of your then position so as that they should approach from the south while you approached from the east?

Answer. No, sir. My directions to my pickets were to surround the town and to meet on the opposite side of town.

Question. Did the force advancing under your immediate command reach the town in a body or did any portion of it lead the advance into the town?

Answer. They did not reach the town in a body; the horses that I had, the Illinois cavalry, were swifter than those of the home guards; the cavalry was ahead.

Question. Where, at what spot, did the home guard desert you?

Answer. I am unable to say. My impression is that they started with us but they dropped off; I can’t say where to my own knowledge.

Question. Was any horsemen of your cavalry ahead of you when you got opposite the court-house?

Answer. I should think that Orderly Glasgow was half a horse ahead of me when we turned the corner. I think there was but three of us when we turned the corner, but I am not positive as I was looking ahead and not behind me. In entering and riding through the town I am only positive that the court-house was on my right hand all the time. I think so.

Question. Did or not you see Glasgow drop his pistol when he reeled in his saddle?

Answer. I did not.

Question. State where you were when you saw him reel in his saddle?

Answer. He was ahead of me when I saw him reel; can’t be positive of the place. I passed him and saw he was wounded but did not see him fall, nor did I notice whether his horse changed his direction. The next time I saw Glasgow he was in a wagon-maker’s shop, or blacksmith’s shop, on the same street on which I entered; that is my impression. The entering part there I am confused about.

Question. Had you passed Kidd’s Hotel before you fired, and how many persons did you fire at?

Answer. Yes; I had passed Kidd’s Hotel, and the number of persons I could see was about four more or less.

Question. Were they in sight when you made the turn at the corner?

Answer. They were in sight after we made the turn. They were on horseback and with guns.

Question. Had your cavalry revolvers?

Answer. A portion of them had revolvers; those with me had revolvers or horse-pistols.

Question. How did you enter the town? Were your sabers drawn or pistols in hand, if you know?

Answer. Pistols in hand; sabers were not drawn.

Question. What number of men had Captain Mitchell and was he on your right or left or rear when you entered the town?

Answer. I do not know the exact number of men be had; say about sixty men. He took the right of the turn, and did not enter I think on my street until he got round to the west end of town.

{p.325}

Question. You say that you, Glasgow and another were in advance as you entered the town. When the start was made by you in pursuit did or did not some one of the party exclaim that they were going to kill some of the damned secesh?

Answer. Not to my recollection; it might have been said; I don’t recollect it.

Question. You say the accused was brought to you. State the terms under which the accused was taken,

Answer. No terms about it that I know of; no agreement made at all.

Question. Was he not taken under the express condition that if he would come down from his position in the attic of the hotel he should be treated as a prisoner of war?

Answer. Not to my knowledge. There was no one there authorized to make such proposition.

Question. Who did take him?

Answer. A detail of men; two-I am not positive-of the Illinois cavalry and one of the home guards.

Question. Did they not report to you when they brought him to you that he was in the attic, difficult of approach, with a revolver; that he determined to defend his life there and would cease to resist only upon the conditions of being treated as a prisoner of war, which they agreed to?

Answer. Nothing of the kind whatever. They never reported to me any such thing.

Question. Who was present at and heard the conversation you have given at first interview with the accused?

Answer. Captain Mitchell was there.

Question. Detail what that conversation was as it actually occurred and in the order in which it occurred and as near as may be in the words of the speaker, without drawing conclusions.

Answer. The first thing that I asked was was his name Magoffin? “Yes, sir,” was his reply. I then asked him if he had any arms. His reply was finally that he had a double-barreled shotgun and a revolver. I then asked him if he had any connection with the Missouri State Guard or the so-called Confederate army as an officer or private. His reply was that he had none whatever, and following that he said he was a private citizen. All the time the conversation was going on it was broken into by the threats of some home guards principally and probably by some of my own men who threatened to shoot him. They were very much infuriated.

Question. Did the home guards hear you state to the accused that he was guilty of assassinating U. S. troops while in the discharge of their duty?

Answer. I don’t know whether they heard me or not.

Question. When you told the accused he was guilty of assassination did he make any reply? If so what?

Answer. His reply was as his reply invariably was to any question in regard to the shooting that he shot in self-defense. I might have made some comments on the reply. I think it was in this wise: That he could not have concluded himself in danger while the troops were running through the town. He said in reply that he thought there was a larger force coming than was there.

Question. At what period was it in the first interview while he was a prisoner in your presence, surrounded by the infuriated home guard, that you delivered a little lecture to the accused?

Answer. It was after I had asked him the question in regard to his position in the army and after he had surrendered his arms.

{p.326}

Question. Can you recollect whether the accused went away for his arms after he was brought into your presence?

Answer. He either told some of my men where they were or went with them himself; I am not positive which.

Question. Was this first interview in the hotel or out of it? If out of it, how far from it?

Answer. It was out of the hotel; I should think probably three rods from the hotel.

Question. Were the home guards who wanted to kill the accused the men who had deserted you?

Answer. I do not know; I presume some of them were.

Question. How soon after your arrival in Sedalia was it that you delivered over the accused under the order of your commanding officer to the officer of the guard?

Answer. I should think within five minutes after we entered the encampment; the same evening of the occurrence at Georgetown and before sundown.

Question. Why did you seek another interview with the accused, and when was that?

Answer. The thought suggested itself to me that I had not examined his person to see if he had any weapons secreted on his person, and further to ascertain if he had any papers to give us any intelligence in regard to the movements of the enemy. This occurred about dusk the same day.

Question. Was it not your purpose to extract a confession from him as to the shooting?

Answer. It was not.

Question. Was the officer of the guard present at the search or any one else besides yourself and accused?

Answer. There was some one else; I can’t say who it was. There was one or two of the guard. Colonel Hughes was not one of them.

Question. Was the conversation you started with him at all necessary to the object you say you had in view, viz, the search?

Answer. No, sir; it was volunteered on my part-wholly unnecessary.

Question. Was it any part of your purpose in going to the second interview to gratify the vindictive feelings you acknowledge to have felt against the accused?

Answer. It was not.

Question. Did you not find on his person a letter directed to the accused by the title of major?

Answer. I did. I don’t know where it is now. The last I saw of it it was with my baggage which was lost at Lexington.

The commission adjourned to meet to-morrow, Saturday, February 15, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February, 15, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of yesterday were being read to the commission by the judge-advocate when at the suggestion of the commission and {p.327} the accused the further reading was dispensed with for the reason that yesterday’s proceedings, composed entirely of the testimony of the witness, Lieut. Col. H. M. Day, would be read to him and to the commission during the morning.

The examination of Lieut. Col. H. M. DAY was resumed.

Question. State the conversation at the interview of the search just as it occurred and in the words of the speakers and in the order in which it occurred, avoiding conclusions and inferences.

Answer. There was but very little conversation had between myself and Mr. Magoffin at the time of the search; by that I mean to be understood that the principal part of the talking was on my part. I told him that I wanted to search him to see what he had on his person, and he replied, “All right,” and commenced pulling off his coat and vest. I am not positive whether he had on a coat or not. While I was examining him I talked very severely to him, in this wise: “Magoffin, I am astounded that a man possessed of as much intelligence as you appear to be should take the course that you have in assassinating Federal troops.” I told him that I hoped he would be shot or hung up by the neck; that I would like to be the man to do it. I told him that he probably would be disposed of in some way-executed on the following day. He during my conversation said but very little; he said that he supposed we came there with a larger force to take prisoners or kill all those who were in favor of seceding from the Federal Government of the United States. That is about all the conversation that I recollect of that evening.

Question. State all the conversation you had with the accused at your next interview with him, using the words of the speakers and preserving the order of the conversation as it occurred, avoiding conclusions and inferences.

Answer. The conversation on the following morning was had soon after his wife and daughter left. I am not positive whether Colonel Hughes was present at that interview or not. I first said to accused, “You probably will never see your wife and daughter.” His reply was “it was a tough case.” I then told him that we had two witnesses that saw him shoot; that we had a sure thing on him. He then said that he had shot what he supposed to be the commander of the forces that were coming into town; that he done it solely because he was in fear of his own life as any man would under similar circumstances. I don’t recollect any other conversation that morning. I might have said something to him to the same effect as I had the evening before.

Question. Did you tell him who the witnesses were? Did he ask who they were?

Answer. He did not ask. I did not tell him. I am not positive as to but one of them-Satterwhite. On my arrival at Sedalia they gave their names to the adjutant.

Question. You say some shots were exchanged you firing two of them. Who fired in exchange and at whom was the fire directed?

Answer. The firing was from those who were running from us; I mean the shots that were exchanged after I shot.

Question. Did they stop and turn their horses to fire, and at what point was that?

Answer. They did not stop their horses; as they turned to go into the timber they slackened their gait and fired. That was on the road what I understood to be from Georgetown to Sedalia. They did not go on the Sedalia road but made a turn to the timber on the north or northeast.

Question. Did you see the pistol of Wheat after he was wounded? If so state how many charges were in it.

Answer. I did not see it.

Question. Did you or not see the pistol of Glasgow after the disturbance was over and if so how many charges were in it?

{p.328}

Answer. I did see Glasgow’s pistol. I am unable to say how many charges were in it. It was a six-shooter. My impression is that I saw the pistol after we were ready to march from Georgetown to Sedalia.

Question. Do you remember or not whether that pistol was picked up from the ground by a citizen and handed to the orderly-sergeant?

Answer. I know nothing in regard to the manner in which the orderly obtained the pistol.

Question. You say you did not know from what place or direction the fire came when Glasgow reeled in his saddle. What prevented your knowledge of that fact?

Answer. I am unable to state.

Question. How far were the men you fired at from you when you fired?

Answer. To the best of my recollection they were off forty rods; they were not more and might have been less.

Question. Were they in sight of you when you made the turn at the court-house?

Answer. They were.

Question. Did the fifteen or twenty men more or less which you saw and chased half or three-quarters of a mile from the town, retire in a body or scatter?

Answer. They retired in a body.

Question. Will you say where it was you saw the muskets?

Answer. At the time I saw what I supposed to be muskets about half a mile from the court-house on the road leading toward Otterville, opposite a brick house on the hill.

Question. Did you see these men enter the town at a full run?

Answer. I did; the men that I saw on the hill.

Question. Are you acquainted with Mr. Mentor Thompson, who lives near Georgetown-an elderly gentleman? If so did you see him leading a horse on the road at that hill before you charged into town?

Answer. I don’t know that I am acquainted with him and have no recollection of seeing him on the road.

Question. Was the accused on the list of marked men which you say you had when you started from Jefferson City?

Answer. His name was not on the list.

Question. Was it or not notorious at Jefferson City among the officers of the United States that the accused was a recruiting officer for Price’s army and that he had a camp of men?

Answer. It was. I suppose that was the reason it was not on the list.

Question. You say that when the man came to you leading a horse, saying it was Magoffin’s horse that was the first intimation you had that the accused was in that part of the country. Where did you suppose him to be?

Answer. I supposed that he was in the army of the Missouri State Guard.

Question. Were you or not under great excitement at the time of your first interview with the accused and was it not a scene of great confusion and noise?

Answer. The time of my first interview with the accused I was not very much excited. There was continual noise and confusion.

{p.329}

By the COMMISSION:

Question. Are you certain that when you entered the town and rode through the streets that the court-house building was always on your right?

Answer. Yesterday I was positive as to the fact but on reflection I am not positive.

Question. What was the cause of the threats on the part of the home guards and some of your men at the time of the first interview you had with the accused?

Answer. I do not know any cause for threats; cannot define any particular cause for threats.

Question. Are you certain that you made the turn at the corner where the building stands which you have described as a two-story building with stairs running up on the outside?

Answer. My impression is the same that it was yesterday, but I am not positive in regard to it on reflection.

Question. Were you wounded at the battle of Lexington?

Answer. I was; two wounds, and was a long time ill. I was wounded in the knee by a spent ball on September 20, on the day of the surrender of Lexington.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the testimony he had given was read to him by the judge-advocate and he requested that the following corrections and additions be made: In reply to question 2 of judge-advocate I say “after I rode about ten rods,” &c.; it should be “over ten rods.” In reply to question 5 of judge-advocate add “I think he wore a dark-colored leghorn hat.” In reply to question 3 by accused insert “afterward I made up my mind,” &c. In reply to question 25 by accused add “I and other officers were engaged in keeping them off.”

The witness was dismissed. The examination on the part of the United States was here closed.

MENTOR THOMPSON, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. What is your name, age and residence, and state where you resided in August last?

Answer. Mentor Thompson; fifty-one years old March 9, 1862; Pettis County, near Georgetown Mo., and resided in August two miles and a half southwest of Georgetown.

Question. If you have any personal knowledge of a disturbance at Georgetown about the latter part of August last arising upon the entrance of U. S. soldiers into that village, state what you saw.

Answer. Well, sir, I was in Georgetown; saw Mr. Magoffin and party of twelve men with him. I left town for home about the middle of the day as well as I can recollect; passed out south of the town. When I got upon the hill about quarter of a mile, perhaps a little more, near Squire Henderson’s house, I saw a body of cavalry as I supposed south of me about 600 yards coming in the direction of Georgetown. I was driving a wild horse and buggy and turned in at Henderson’s lot; hitched my horse; got over in the yard and went to the fence on the roadside. When I got there the cavalry came up and stopped in the road right opposite where I was on the hill; house on east side of road. There were two of the cavalrymen from 50 to 100 yards behind the main body of men. They came dashing through the crowd of men, soldiers and a few civilians and they remarked that they would “kill some of the damned secessionists;” another man followed after them. There was a large hollow there between Henderson’s and the town. They had crossed and had ascended the hill half-way on the other aide toward the town before any of that party who were on {p.330} the hill made a move in the direction of the town. I remained in my position until I saw them at the southeast corner of the court-house yard or square. When at that corner or turning the corner I saw the flash of a pistol or gun as I supposed and heard the report, and what I supposed to be a pistol. Immediately after, the report of from two to five pistol shots as I supposed. I then heard the report of what I supposed to be a large shotgun or something of that sort; heard the report of two guns what I supposed to be shotguns. There were some two or three guns or pistols tired after that I could not tell which. I thought they were pistol shots. I then got in my buggy and left for home.

Question. What road did you come out of Georgetown to Henderson’s?

Answer. The road from Georgetown to Sedalia. The men went into town by the same road that I came out.

Question. In coming from the town to Henderson’s did you or not meet any body of armed men on horseback riding at full run toward the town?

Answer. I did not, sir.

Question. Did you leave the road after starting from the town until you reached Henderson’s?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. From your position at Henderson’s had you a full view of the road from Henderson’s to the northeast corner of the court-house?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you or not from your position at Hederson’s see a body of armed men on horseback chased by the three soldiers you speak of?

Answer. I did not, sir.

Question. Did you lose sight of the three soldiers after they started at any time? If so state at what point.

Answer. Not until they turned the northeast corner of court-house square.

Question. Are you certain that you saw the smoke or flash and heard the report of a pistol at the northeast corner of the court-house square?

Answer. I am certain.

Question. How soon after you saw the flash and heard the first report before you heard the next report?

Answer. Within a few seconds.

Question. How soon after that before you heard the report of what you took to be a shotgun?

Answer. It was within a few seconds after that.

Question. From your position on the hill could you see the northwest corner of the court-house square?

Answer. Could not, sir.

Question. Could you tell from what point the report of the shotgun came?

Answer. No, sir; I could not.

Question. You say you saw the accused and twelve of his men. How were they armed?

Answer. They were armed with double-barreled shotguns. I did not notice particularly. I thought they were shotguns.

{p.331}

Question. Do you know when they came into town that day or were they there when you went to town?

Answer. I think they came in after I got to town. I saw the party ride down the street and hitch their horses.

Question. How did they come in, at what place, and how long was this before you started home?

Answer. They were riding in a walk down the street all together in a line. I suppose it must have been one hour.

Question. Where did they hitch their horses?

Answer. Hitched them to the court-house square fence; some on the north and some on the west side of the square.

Question. Do you know where the accused hitched his horse?

Answer. Yes, sir; he hitched his horse at the northwest corner of the square.

Question. Were the accused and his men in the town when you left for home?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. What were they doing if you know?

Answer. They were standing upon the street not doing anything particular.

Question. Did you see on that day any other body of armed men than those you have spoken of?

Answer. I did not, sir.

Question. What do you think was the amount of the force you saw at Henderson’s, and did you know any of them?

Answer. I thought there were some twenty-five or thirty men at Henderson’s. I knew none of the soldiers. I knew some of the citizens-civilians.

Question. Were all of the force you saw at Henderson’s in uniform?

Answer. Of those three men that rode into town the last one I do not think was in military dress; the soldiers-all the rest were in uniform-the civilians were armed and on horseback.

Question. When you started from Henderson’s for home where was the main body?

Answer. They were going up into town in the same direction as the other three.

Question. Do you remember how the accused was dressed that day?

Answer. No, sir; I don’t believe I do. He had on citizen’s dress-I recollect that. In his every-day dress, such as I had seen him in town there wear frequently before.

Question. Whereabouts in the town did you see the accused that day and what was he doing?

Answer. I saw him at Fischer’s store and at the drug store; he was standing talking with some gentlemen.

Question. Where is Fischer’s store and where the drug store?

Answer. Fischer’s store is across the street from the northwest corner of courthouse square. It is the corner house on the main cross street; two-story frame building; stairs outside on the side of the building next to Main street. The drug store is across the street west, a little north of the center of the square, about fifty feet south of Fischer’s.

Question. Do you know whether the armed civilians you saw at Henderson’s were home guards?

Answer. I do not, sir; but I don’t think they were.

{p.332}

Question. Where had you seen the accused last before you saw him in Georgetown that day?

Answer. I do not recollect where.

Question. Could you say whether the first pistol flash was from a man on horseback or on foot?

Answer. I could not, sir. I took it to be from one of the men on horseback.

Question. What obstruction prevented you seeing the northwest corner of the court-house square?

Answer. The trees in the court-house yard. The court-house itself would prevent my seeing it from my position.

Question. How near the court-house square on its east front does the road run up which the three men galloped?

Answer. It runs right along the east side of the court-house square.

Question. Is the hill at Henderson’s as high as the ground occupied by the court-house yard?

Answer. I think it is, sir.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. What was the distance from where you stood at Henderson’s to the northeast corner of court-house square where you saw the soldiers turning the corner?

Answer. Well, sir, I think it was about 600 yards.

Question. You say in your statement that when the soldiers turned the northeast corner of court-house square you saw the flash of a pistol or gun. Could you readily tell at the distance you were off (600 yards) the flash or report of a pistol from a gun?

Answer. Well, I thought so, sir. I supposed it to be a pistol from the report.

Question. Did you see the accused with the body of men whom you saw come slowly riding down the street?

Answer. Yes, sir he was with them.

Question. Do you know whether the accused had any particular connection with those men? and if so state what.

Answer. I don’t know that he had any particular connection with them. I did not know the men.

By the COMMISSION:

Question. How long had you been in town before the accused came in?

Answer. I think I had been about one hour and a half-that is before I saw him.

Question. Did he give his men any order of a military character?

Answer. None that I heard.

Question. How were they clad?

Answer. All in citizens’ dress. I noticed nothing peculiar in their dress. I did not notice their dress particularly.

Question. How far from the town plat is the place where you met the troops?

Answer. It is 250 yards, and there were two cross streets between me and the north side of the square. The court-house stands on the third block. One street is fifty feet wide and the street adjoining the square is sixty feet wide.

{p.333}

Question. How far do you live from the residence of the accused?

Answer. I live about nine miles.

Question. How long have you known him?

Answer. I have known him some five or six years. I don’t remember the time exactly; have known him ever since he has been in the county.

Question. What are your personal relations with him-intimate and friendly, or otherwise?

Answer. Friendly.

Question. What sympathy is there between you and him-politically, religiously or otherwise?

Answer. I understand he was a member of a Christian church, and I am a member of a Christian church. We have voted differently-he has been a Democrat and I am a Whig. We differ now in politics. Do not belong to any secret association with him or anybody else.

Question. What are your sentiments in relation to the present troubles?

Answer. My sentiments are that I would like very much to have peace restored; have been so all the time.

Question. On what terms?

Answer. On terms in conformity to the provisions of the Constitution.

Question. On which side are your sympathies?

Answer. My sympathies are with the Southern people.

The testimony of the witness was read to him by the judge-advocate and there being no additions or corrections to be made the witness was dismissed.

GEORGE S. BROWN, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, age and where you resided in August last.

Answer. George S. Brown; twenty-six years old; resided near Georgetown, two and a half miles northeast.

Question. If you know anything of a disturbance that took place in Georgetown about the last of August, 1861, arising upon the entry of United States soldiers in that village state it.

Answer. I went up to Georgetown on business and I was at the post-office when Colonel Magoffin and twelve men rode down the street. The post-office is-near the suburbs in the western portion of the town. I remained there at the post-office after Colonel Magoffin passed down the street with his men, and I proceeded down the street to Mr. Hoge’s drug store. When I stepped in Colonel Magoffin was in the drug store. I spoke to him and started to walk out of the door. Just at that time his men came from the court-house (they bad been up in the court-house) to the drug store where Colonel Magoffin was. They reported to him that there was a large dust over toward Sedalia. Colonel Magoffin then asked me if I knew where the Irish shoe shop was. I told him it was around in Captain Kidd’s Hotel on Main street. He asked me to walk around there with him; that he wished to get a pair of boots for Charlie Hardin, his son-in-law; that as he had his gun the Irishman might think he wished to hurt him in some way. He did not wish to frighten him in any way. All he wished was to know if the boots were done. When he asked me to go round there with him he ordered one or two of his men, I am not positive which, to get on their horses and ride round on the brow of the hill below the printing office, [on road] out of town, to see if they could see any armed men or soldiers coming, and whilst they were getting on their horses we went round to the shoe shop. All the rest of his men accompanied him. Colonel Magoffin after he walked into the shoe shop and asked the question about the boots walked out. He was standing on the {p.334} pavement before Captain Kidd’s tavern. In a few minutes his men who were sent off returned and reported that the enemy was coming. They came back full tilt. His other men who were standing around him broke for their horses. Colonel Magoffin ordered them to halt some two or three times I am not positive which, but they paid no attention to his command or order but ran, unhitched their horses and mounted them. Colonel Magoffin walked briskly to his horse after he found that his men would not halt. When Colonel Magoffin got to his horse the bridle was off. He unhitched the bridle from the fence and put it on his horse, and when he attempted to get up his foot either slipped or the stirrup leather broke I could not say which. Just at that time three Federal soldiers wheeled the corner of the court-house fence and just as they wheeled they hallooed “here they are,” and fired. Well, there was from three to five pistol reports before I heard the report of the shotgun. Well, sir; there were two of the three soldiers ran, riding as hard as their horses could go up Main street in pursuit of. Magoffin’s men, and fired some three or four shots after they passed where I was standing myself. I was standing right on the platform in front of Mr. Fischer’s store, right on Main street. The other soldier turned the northwest corner of the court-house fence and went up to Mr. loge’s drug store. He was sitting there on his horse for a few minutes when there was some one came to his assistance and aided him to get off his horse. In a few minutes after that the whole town was alive with soldiers.

Question. At what part of the town-east, west, north or south-did the accused and his twelve men enter the town?

Answer. Entered the town from the west, right down the Lexington road.

Question. Where were the horses-of the twelve men hitched and where was the horse of the accused hitched?

Answer. The horse of the accused was hitched at the northwest corner of the court-house fence. The most of the other horses were hitched on Main street on the north side of the court-house fence.

Question. How far was the printing office from the court-house square and in what direction from the court-house?

Answer. It was some 100 or 150 yards from the court-house and very near a southeast direction from the court-house, and on the left-hand side of the street as you go to Sedalia and within the town.

Question. Did you change your position at any time after the first fire? If so state in what respect.

Answer. I did. I was standing, and moved right back against the store; it was about half-way between the building. The building is between fifty and seventy-five feet long.

Question. From that position could you see the accused?

Answer. I could not, sir.

Question. Did you know either of the three soldiers who turned the northeast corner of the court-house square and fired?

Answer. I did not, sir.

Question. Do you now know Colonel Day, and can you say whether he was one of the two men who ran past you?

Answer. I cannot, sir.

Question. From what direction did the report of the shotgun come?

Answer. It came from about the vicinity of the northwest corner of the courthouse fence where I last saw Magoffin. I heard but one report of shotgun.

Question. Could you or not see the pistols in the hands of the three soldiers?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you go around to where the wounded man was assisted from his horse? If so state his condition,-whether dead or alive and where and how wounded.

{p.335}

Answer. I walked around some five or ten minutes after the shooting occurred. When I was standing last up the street he had been assisted from his horse. He was not dead and I did not see where he was shot. I saw where he was bloody around the neck. I did not see him afterward.

Question. Do you know whether the accused got or was getting on that day in town shoes for any of the twelve men?

Answer. I heard him inquiring for merchants, that he wished to get some shoes for his men. The doors were closed because it was reported that the soldiers were coming in.

Question. Did you see any other body of armed men that day except the U. S. soldiers and the home guards and the twelve men?

Answer. I did not, sir.

Question. Did you know anything about a body of armed men on horseback without uniforms numbering about fifteen or twenty men who were chased into the town of Georgetown by the U. S. cavalry on that day?

Answer. No, sir; I do not.

Question. Were you at Kidd’s Hotel at the capture or surrender of the accused? If so state what you know of either.

Answer. No, sir; I was not. I was at Mr. Phillips’ store when they caught him at Kidd’s Hotel.

Question. Were you present when he was carried before Colonel Day and there tied? If so state any conversation you heard there between the colonel and the accused.

Answer. I was not there.

Question. Are you certain that the firing by the three men with pistols was before the report of the shotgun?

Answer. I am, sir.

Question. In what direction did they fire, and at the time of the fire were they in full run?

Answer. They were in full run and they fired right at the men who were leaving their position at the court-house fence-leaving as fast as they knew how.

Question. How many of the twelve men passed you up Main street after the firing began?

Answer. There were some six or seven passed me after the firing began.

Question. When the accused went to his horse did he have his gun, and what sore of a gun was it?

Answer. Yes, sir; he had his gun. It was a double-barreled shotgun.

Question. Was the accused in full view of you up to the time you changed your position by going back to the wall of Fischer’s store?

Answer. He was in full view of me up to that time.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. How far had Colonel Magoffin’s men gone when his foot slipped in the stirrup?

Answer. Some had not left the fence; some had gone.

By the COMMISSION:

Question. You speak of Magoffin’s men; why do you call them by that term?

{p.336}

Answer. Because I understood he was a recruiting officer and I had heard him call them his men when he wanted to purchase for them. By some he was called major and by some colonel.

Question. Do you know what was the object of the accused-and his men in coming to Georgetown? Was he in command of a band for any particular purpose?

Answer. I do not; only as a recruiting officer.

Question. What are your sympathies in relation to the present troubles?

Answer. I am a strong Constitutional man.

The commission adjourned to meet on Monday next, February 17, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 17, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The proceedings of Saturday, February 15, were read over in part to the commission at the suggestion of the commission and the accused. The part read was the testimony of George S. Brown. The testimony of Lieutenant-Colonel Day and of Mentor Thompson, taken on Saturday, had been read to the commission and the witnesses on that day and the rereading was therefore dispensed with.

DANIEL B. SANDERS, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, age and residence.

Answer. Daniel E. Sanders; twenty-one years old; Georgetown, Pettis County, Mo.

Question. If you know anything of a disturbance at Georgetown in August last arising from the entry of some U. S. soldiers into that village state it.

Answer. The accused came into town on that day, August (I don’t remember the day) about 12 o’clock with twelve men, and I think it was about an hour after he came la when the alarm was given that the Federal troops were coming. At that time I saw Mr. Magoffin standing on the sidewalk, and in three minutes after the Federal soldiers came in. Just before they came in the part of Colonel Magoffin’s men that went around the court-house square-I don’t know whether they were sent-came running back in full speed on their horses. I suppose to the best of my recollection they were about fifty yards ahead of the Federal soldiers. Just as the Federal soldiers turned the corner of the square there was three or more came in first; there was between three and five shots fired at the men that were running; the shots were fired by the Federal soldiers. I did not know any of them at that time but became acquainted with them afterward-the one that was wounded. Well, after the shooting was over I saw Colonel Magoffin run; he was shot at once or twice as he run; he was found shot about an hour after that in Kidd’s Hotel. That is all I know about it.

Question. At what place in the town was the accused when he was shot at by the Federal soldiers?

Answer. He was running south of Fischer’s store in the direction of Kidd’s Hotel-the back part of Kidd’s Hotel.

Question. What corner of the court-house square was it that the Federal soldiers turned and where were you then?

Answer. They turned the northeast corner, there where I first saw them. I was in my office up stairs over Fischer’s. I was employed by Fischer settling his business.

{p.337}

Question. What sidewalk was it that you say the accused was standing on when the alarm was given that the Federal troops were coming? Describe the place.

Answer. It was on Fischer’s sidewalk on Main street. The window of my office looked out to the north. The platform extended beyond the line of the court-house fence.

Question. Did you see the accused at the time the Federal soldiers first fired or notice where he went from the sidewalk?

Answer. I did not see him after he left the sidewalk until I saw him run.

Question. What did the Federal soldiers fire with?

Answer. I don’t know with what kind of arms. The one that was wounded fired with holster pistol.

Question. Did you see a shotgun fired or hear the report of one? If so at what time before or after the firing by the Federal soldiers?

Answer. I heard the report of one after the firing by the Federal soldiers.

Question. Did you see the accused have a gun that day? If so when and where?

Answer. I saw him have it; when he was on the sidewalk he had a gun.

Question. From where you stood could you see distinctly the Federal soldiers as they turned the northeast corner of the square?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you see the soldier who died? If so did you see his pistol?

Answer. Yes, sir; I saw his pistol. I did not examine it. I saw a gentleman pick it up-Samuel H. Brown. It was a holster pistol.

Question. Do you know Mr. Mentor Thompson and George S. Brown, and did you or did you not see them in Georgetown that day?

Answer. I do know them and did see them there that day.

Question. Were you present at Kidd’s Hotel when the accused was taken or surrendered? If so state the circumstances.

Answer. I was not at Kidd’s Hotel. I did not see him until they had started out of town with him.

Question. Were you present at any conversation between Colonel Day and the accused on that day?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Is there any obstruction to the view from the northeast corner of the square to Henderson’s house?

Answer. None at all; none from the fence. Henderson’s house sets back from the road.

Question. From the printing office is the view to Henderson’s obstructed?

Answer. No, sir. The distance from the printing office to the northeast corner of the court-house square is about 150 yards.

Question. Do you know whether the accused was or not a recruiting officer under the then governor, Jackson?

Answer. I do not.

Question. Can you state how many of the accused’s men came galloping giving the alarm?

{p.338}

Answer. I can’t say the exact number. The men who went round the court-house square first gave the alarm-four or six; I don’t know the number of them.

Question. Which way did they go round?

Answer. I think they went round by the south side of the court-house square. They were on horseback.

Question. Did you see them return; and if so which way did they come?

Answer. Yes, sir. They came up Main street having turned the northeast corner; they came round that way.

Question. Did you know where the horse of the accused was hitched?

Answer. He was hitched near the northwest corner of court-house fence. The horses of the others were hitched some on the north and some on the west side.

Question. What part of the town did the accused and the twelve men enter and how-rapidly or slowly?

Answer. He entered from the west part of town slowly, on horseback-horses all walking.

Question. Did you see any other body of armed men that day in town besides the twelve men and the U. S. forces?

Answer. No, sir.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. You say the accused came into town about 12 o’clock on that day. Did you see him enter and where were you at the time?

Answer. I was at the Pacific Hotel in the west part of the town and saw them enter. Pacific Hotel is on south side of Main street about 400 yards west of Kidd’s Hotel.

Question. What was the accused doing with twelve men in town that day? Do you know whether it was a party headed by accused for any particular object or a mere chance meeting?

Answer. I do not know, sir.

Question. Why did you not state in your narrative of events the fact that you heard the report of a shotgun before you saw the Federal soldiers shoot at the accused?

Answer. I forgot it.

Question. Did you hear the report of shotguns immediately after the Federal soldiers first fired or how long after?

Answer. It was a very short time after. It was all in a minute the shooting was done, or in a very few minutes. Immediately after the first firing the report of a shotgun was heard. This firing was all at our corner and was done in a short time.

Question. Do you know what those men were doing in town on that day, and were they residents of the county or strangers so far as you know?

Answer. I knew some of them-some I did not. I don’t know what they were doing that day.

Question. Who fired at the accused as he was running after you heard the report of the shotgun?

Answer. I don’t know the gentleman; he belonged to the Federal Army.

Question. Where were you when you saw these soldiers turning the corner and what were you doing?

Answer. I was upstairs in my office.

{p.339}

Question. How could you see the soldiers coming down Main street or turning the corner?

Answer. I heard the alarm and was looking out of the window fronting on Main street.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. What do you mean by looking out of the window?

Answer. I heard the alarm and was sitting by the open window and put my head out.

The testimony given by the witness was read over to him by the judge-advocate and he requested permission to add as follows: In his statement he says “there were between three and five shots fired at the men that were running.” He modifies it by saying “in the direction of the men that were running.”

JOHN G. HUTCHISON, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, age and residence.

Answer. John G. Hutchison; near forty-five years of age; a mile from Syracuse, Cooper County, Mo.

Question. Are you connected by blood or marriage with the accused? If so state how.

Answer. Yes, sir; he married my sister.

Question. State if you know what connection the accused had with the armies of Jackson and Price in arms against the United States?

Answer. I know personally nothing.

Question. Did you ever see the paper written and left at the residence of the accused by Colonel Brown on the night of the death of Mrs. Magoffin? If so state its contents as well as you are able.

Answer. Yes, sir. “This safeguard permits E. Magoffin to remain with his family for ten days” (or until the 20th, I don’t recollect which-ten days, I think) “with privilege of visiting our headquarters,” and then something about soldiers or officers to respect this safeguard. That would be the substance of it and that safeguard I had in my possession about twenty-four hours. On the 11th or 12th of December I gave it up. It was signed by Colonel Brown, acting aide-de-camp to somebody else.

Question. Was the safeguard confined to the protection of the person of the accused or did it or not embrace his property?

Answer. From the reading of it I supposed it was only his person. From a conversation a day or two afterward he supposed that his property was protected by it. He had not seen the safeguard until I gave it to him. The safeguard was given to me so that he would not have to show himself when officers called.

Question. Did you have any occasion to use that paper for protection of the accused or his property? If so state the circumstances.

Answer. His house was surrounded by troops on the 11th of December-I am not sure whether it was the 10th or 11th-before the funeral. I then showed the safeguard to the commander of the troops-U. S. cavalry troops. They then retired; they molested no person. They called for hay and corn for feeding their horses. My father told them to go and get it.

Question. After that do you know of any depredations being committed on the property of the accused by Federal soldiers? If so state when and the circumstances.

Answer. On the next day a regiment passed Mr. Magoffin’s. The soldiers killed a good many of his hogs, turkeys and chickens. Colonel Thayer, First Nebraska Regiment, he had command. I was told so. There were two regiments. It was Colonel {p.340} Thayer’s men who killed the hogs. Know them by their dress. I told them the property there was under the protection of the Government. They said it made no difference with them. I had this conversation with the privates. The Federal soldiers that same day destroyed fencing to make a bridge or to fill a mud-hole. The accused was then in the yard at his house. This was after the funeral-the day after the funeral.

Question. Do you know what the arrangement was between the officers of the Government of the United States and the accused by which he was permitted to visit his wife, then in extremis?

Answer. I do not.

Question. Did you have any agency in making that arrangement?

Answer. None.

Question. How long did you remain at the house of accused before you returned home?

Answer. I was there for several days-some days at Mr. Magoffin’s house and some at my father’s. They lived about three miles apart.

Question. Do you know anything of the circumstances connected with another safeguard, either as to its procurement or its return?

Answer. Nothing personally.

Question. Were you present at a conversation that occurred at the hog-pen between the accused and Colonel Hughes?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Have you any knowledge of a conspiracy to assassinate the accused, or do you know whether information of such a purpose came to the accused before the 20th of December?

Answer. I do not-to both questions. I left the neighborhood on the 13th or 14th of December.

Question. If you know any fact or circumstance not previously stated by you favorable to the innocence of the accused state it.

Answer. The day those hogs were killed Mr. Magoffin told me he would be compelled to go back to the army as there was no protection for his property or for himself. The soldiers told me that if I drove the hogs away they would shoot me.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Do you know that the safeguard protected the person of the accused on the day Colonel Thayer and his command passed by? Was the safeguard shown to the officer in command?

Answer. The safeguard was not shown. It was in my pocket at the time. Colonel Thayer knew of the safeguard. He was at Colonel Magoffin’s the day before and I told him of the safeguard. He may have known it before as he did not come to arrest him.

Question. Do you know if any complaint was made to the commanding officer that his men were killing hogs, turkeys and chickens?

Answer. I do not. They were only a short distance apart; they were stopping to rest on the road-perhaps half an hour.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. How were the hogs killed-by shooting or otherwise, and what was done with them after they were killed?

Answer. By shooting and then they were thrown into the wagons.

The testimony of the witness was read to him by the judge-advocate and he was dismissed.

{p.341}

CHARLES A. HARDIN, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, age and residence and whether you are related to accused by blood or marriage.

Answer. Charles A. Hardin; twenty-five years old; Georgetown, Pettis County; I married the daughter of the accused.

Question. State any knowledge you have of the connection the accused has had with the army of Price or Jackson, and in what capacities.

Answer. I could not say positively whether the accused was connected with the army previous to this occurrence or not-I mean by occurrence the shooting at Georgetown. I can state some facts that will throw some light on the subject. A short time before the battle of Carthage Colonel Magoffin left home expressing his intention to his family to connect himself with Price’s army. I saw nothing more of him until about four or five days after the battle of Carthage. It may have been as much as two or even three weeks before the battle of Carthage that he left home. Well, when he got back home he gave us a very graphic description of that battle; spoke of his having been in it. Well, he also spoke of frequent conversations he had with Claiborne F. Jackson showing that he was in his confidence. At least that was the impression he made on my mind at the time. Well, just about the time of his return he began to raise a regiment. Ho succeeded in getting from Saline and Pettis Counties about 225 or 230 men; that is what I understood. I did not count them but saw them. They were quartered near his house while I was there. Well, I saw them drawn up in front of the house and witnessed an election and the accused was elected major. It was a short time after the battle of Carthage and before the occurrence at Georgetown. Well, he had a son, Captain Magoffin who was in charge of one company. Colonel Magoffin sent his son’s company (Captain Magoffin) and my impression is he sent all the others to Price’s army. He remained at home himself, but I heard him say repeatedly that he expected to rejoin the army or the men that he had sent out there. Well, there were twelve men I think that I heard from him he got from across the river, and there was a portion of the company that had not arrived and he was waiting for them-the captain of the company and the rest of the men. It was during that time the occurrence took place at Georgetown. I was at Colonel Magoffin’s house on the morning of that occurrence when they started into town-that is the accused and the twelve men. Colonel Magoffin remarked to me that he wanted to get shoes or clothing or something for his men. I handed him a $5 bill and told him to get my boots at the shop there which I had had footed. I did not see the accused again until I saw him a prisoner at Lexington. While I was there I was informed by Colonel Tracy, Colonel Taylor and another colonel whose name I forget, that General Price was willing to exchange certain prisoners he had for the accused, and I had a talk with Colonel Marshall on the subject who declined for the reason that he thought it was unfair to exchange prisoners who had taken up arms for prisoners in Price’s hands who were citizens, such as Governor King, Judge Ryland, &c. Colonel Magoffin showed me a commission from Price appointing him colonel. I do not recollect its date. This was after the battle of Lexington. I read it.

Question. In what capacity did the accused act at the battle of Carthage?

Answer. I do not know. He stated that he was at the battle of Carthage but did not state his capacity. He mentioned that he received orders from Jackson and had received prisoners.

Question. Since the battle of Lexington what so far as you know has the accused been doing?

Answer. Well, I don’t know. He had been with Price’s army until he came home when his wife was sick. The family sent word to him at Price’s army that his wife was sick. This was about the latter part of November. The accused was not at home I know from the date of the battle of Lexington, September 20, until he was sent for as above.

Question. Were you at the house of the accused during the last illness of his wife? If so do you know anything of the arrangement made between Colonel Brown and the accused?

{p.342}

Answer. Yes, sir; I was there on the evening of the arrival of the accused from Price’s army. He staid one night at home and went over into Saline, there being a pretty considerable Federal force at Sedalia at the time. His wife continued to get worse; she was at that time quite sick. On Saturday, the 7th of December, we despaired of Mrs. Magoffin’s recovery and my wife wrote a note to Colonel Magoffin requesting him to come home that night. Some time after the note had been sent, a little after dark, the house was surrounded by Federal troops and occupied by them with the exception of Mrs. Magoffin’s sick-room. They were searching for the accused. At my solicitation the officers did not enter Mrs. Magoffin’s room. Well, I reckon it was about 5 o’clock that night Colonel Magoffin rode up within sixty yards of the house. He was fired at by three sentinels but escaped, leaving his horse behind him. I saw nothing more of the accused until Sunday night, the troops occupying the house until Sunday morning. Sunday night-I think it must have been as late as 11 or 12 o’clock-Colonel Magoffin came in the house. I was asleep at the time but my wife came and woke me up and I went down to the sickroom and saw Colonel Magoffin kneeling by the side of his wife. Ho remained there perhaps two hours-three may be. He told me he had been in sight of the house the whole time. He remarked to me that he could have gotten away but did not have the heart to leave his wife. At the suggestion of his mother-in-law, old Mr. Hutchison went over to Doctor Hughes’. Colonel Magoffin also went over, but don’t recollect whether it was before or after Mr. Hutchison returned. This was Sunday night. I saw nothing more of Colonel Magoffin until Monday night. He then came home in company with Colonel Brown and Colonel Hughes. He went first into his wife’s room. I followed pretty soon after and found him kneeling by his wife and her arms around his neck; the children also kneeling around. There was a great deal of confusion. I met Colonel Brown coming out of the room. He seemed very much agitated; I believe shedding tears at the time he came out. I remained in the room but a short time and went into the dining-room where I found Colonel Brown and Colonel Hughes. Colonel Brown asked me if there was any paper convenient and I think Miss Belle Magoffin left the room and in a short time returned with a single half sheet of paper. We noticed something on the back of it. He had sat down and I asked him or Colonel Hughes-I don’t recollect which-what arrangement they had made. One of them stated to me-I can’t recollect which-that they had allowed Colonel Magoffin ten days to remain at home and during that time to consider a proposition which they had presented to him. I asked them what proposition that was. They told me that they had proposed to protect Colonel Magoffin in his person and property if he would give his parole of honor not to take up arms against the Government. Well, after he had made that statement to me he sat down and commenced writing the safeguard. After he had finished it he handed it to some one. I read it. I think it granted him permission to remain at home and to go to Sedalia and Georgetown. To do so he had to pass the lines. I think it also forbid any one to interrupt him or his property during the ten days. I do not remember there was anything else in the safeguard. Colonel Magoffin and me went out one evening after the burial of his wife to the hog-pen. We were sitting there talking about this proposition that they left with him when Colonel Hughes came up and addressed Colonel Magoffin very cordially, and said, “Mac, you had better stay at home.” I think that was the remark. Colonel Magoffin stated to Colonel Hughes that he would like very much to do so on account of his children and the deranged condition of his affairs. Colonel Hughes then remarked that Colonel Brown would be out the next morning to arrange about it-to see about it. Colonel Magoffin remarked that he would be glad to see Colonel Brown.

Question. Were you present at a conversation between Colonel Hughes and the accused at the hog-pen? If so state your understanding of what was said, and especially what was said touching a second paper.

Answer. I heard nothing that I remember of about the paper. Colonel Magoffin said when we returned to the house that he was afraid the United States Government would not protect his property; that he would give anything in the world to stay at home in peace. The next day-evening I think it was-when Colonel Hughes came I was absent. The next evening I came home. I met my wife in the door and she seemed very much alarmed. She remarked to me that her pa had received information from two different quarters that if he remained at home he would be assassinated that night. I endeavored to remove her fears, bat she replied that there could be no correspondence between the two informants and that her father’s life was in great danger. Colonel Magoffin came into the room and asked me to take a walk with him and he betrayed more emotion, trepidation than I had ever witnessed in him before. Usually he is a very cool man. He told me about the same my wife had told me and as we walked across the meadow in the direction of the woods he asked {p.343} my advice-what course he should pursue. I advised him to stay at home, and I think persuaded him; at any rate he walked down to the woods and got his gun which he had never taken away since he came home the night he was fired at by the sentinels. He said when he took his gun, “I will put this by my bedside to-night, and if any one attempts to assassinate me he will pay dearly for it.” He came back to the house, and when he got there he walked into a room where his mother-in-law (Mrs. Hutchison) was and he remained there in conversation about an hour-I don’t recollect how long. He came back and stated to me that he had changed his mind. He said that on account of his children he would hate to be assassinated in his own house or to bring any further difficulty on them by being there, or words to the same effect. I asked him what arrangement he had made with Colonel Hughes. He told me that Colonel Hughes had left a paper lying on the table and told me I could read it. I read the paper and said to Colonel Magoffin, “Did you give your parole of honor to remain at home ?” He told me he had not; that he had ten days to decide that matter. I then asked him the question, “Colonel, why did Colonel Hughes leave that paper here? That seems to imply that you had given your parole of honor.” He remarked to me that there could be no misunderstanding about the matter as it was clearly understood he was to have ten days to decide; “but,” says he, “for fear that there should be some misunderstanding about the matter I will write a letter to Colonel Hughes.” He was at that time walking the floor. The paper was brought in to him by one of his daughters I believe. He remarked to me that he felt very nervous and he would prefer that I should write the letter at his dictation. I sat down and wrote the letter myself as he dictated it, word for word. He started away that evening and left word that the letter should be sent to Colonel Hughes immediately, and if I am not mistaken the safeguard accompanied it.

(The judge-advocate shows the witness the letter marked C which he acknowledges to be the one he alludes to.)

The next morning the witness sent the letter up to Mr. Hutchison’s-it was either that night or the next morning. I saw him leave the room after bidding us all good-bye. He went off on horseback. Don’t know whether the accused took his gun or not; I did not see it afterward.

The testimony given by the witness was read to him by the judge-advocate and he was dismissed.

The commission adjourned to meet to-morrow, Tuesday, February 18, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 18, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The proceedings of yesterday were being read by the judge-advocate when at the suggestion of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with for the reason that the testimony of the three witnesses examined yesterday was read to them and to the commission in each case after it was given.

H. T. WALKER, captain, Missouri State Guard, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, rank, age and present condition.

Answer. H. T. Walker; captain in Missouri State Guard; regiment not permanently organized; twenty-eight years old; prisoner of war.

Question. Were you or not at the battle of Carthage? If so state whether you have any knowledge as to the fact of the accused being engaged in that fight and on which side.

Answer. I was at the battle of Carthage. I saw Colonel Magoffin there; he was with General Parsons. There were four prisoners came into my charge that day and I delivered them over to Colonel Magoffin.

{p.344}

Question. Do you know whether the accused at any other place and time was with the army of Price? If so where when and in what capacity?

Answer. I do not, sir. I saw him at the battle of Lexington the evening he was liberated.

Question. In what county do you reside when at home, and was your connection with the State Guard constant or only at intervals?

Answer. In Pettis County. It was constant, sir, until the battle of Lexington.

Question. Were you taken prisoner at Milford? If so state whether the prisoner was there in arms or taking part against the U. S. forces.

Answer. Yes, sir. I did not see the prisoner until the morning after the surrender. I was then acting in my capacity as captain. Colonel Robertson commanded my regiment.

Question. Can you give the date of the battle of Carthage? Can you give the date of your capture at Milford?

Answer. I think it was the 10th of July. Our capture at Milford I think was on the 19th of December.

Question. Where were you about the 28th of August last? Do you know of anything of the disturbance at Georgetown about that time?

Answer. I know nothing about it only from hearsay.

Question. Before you started for the army at that time do you know whether the accused was engaged in recruiting soldiers for Price’s army?

Answer. I think he was; I can’t say that I do know it.

Question. Do you know of any arrangements being made for the exchange of the accused while he was a prisoner at Lexington?

Answer. I heard officers in our army talk of exchanging Judge Ryland for the accused.

Question. How long were you encamped on Blackwater before you were taken?

Answer. We got there a little before day and taken the next afternoon.

Question. When you did see the accused at Milford had he any arms?

Answer. No, sir; he had no arms. We were all disarmed at the time.

Question. Do you know Capt. E. H. Magoffin? If so state whether you met him in the army of Price-where, when and in what capacity.

Answer. The first time I saw him in the army was last May; he was a second lieutenant. I next saw him at Boonville; he was a lieutenant then also. About the last of August I joined him near Clinton on his way to join Price. He was then in command of a company.

Question. At Jefferson City in May upon the first call for volunteers by Jackson did you or not see the accused?

Answer. No, sir; I don’t think I saw the colonel there.

Question. Is the army of Price uniformed or not?

Answer. No, sir Some of the officers have uniforms and some have not; the majority of them have not.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Are you a commissioned officer?

Answer. I have never received a commission. I think the officers receive commissions; after they have been elected and have opportunity they receive commissions.

{p.345}

Question. Have not the officers in Price’s army some distinctive uniform, mark or badge by which they could be known by their men or distinguished from privates?

Answer. A very few of them.

Question. By whose order did you deliver the prisoners to the accused at the battle of Carthage and what position did he hold as the recipient of prisoners?

Answer. I did not deliver them by any order at all. The prisoners were in my way and I gave them over to Magoffin.

Question. During the morning and day of your encampment near Milford and before the surrender how many recruits came in, and what proportion of them was armed and what number unarmed to the best of your knowledge?

Answer. I have no knowledge of any recruits coming in that day.

Question. Before the prisoners were captured what proportion of the force encamped near Milford was armed?

Answer. I think that it was less than one-half.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. At Boonville and Carthage what was the condition of the State forces as to regular organization?

Answer. I hardly think it was a perfect organization-some regiments and some companies were formed; others that were not full some companies that were not attached to any regiment.

Question. What was the number of your force at Milford, and how many prisoners were in point of fact taken?

Answer. I do not know the number of force there. I should put it down at 600. Some escaped.

F. S. ROBERTSON captain [colonel?] Missouri State Guard, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, age, rank (if any) and your present condition.

Answer. F. S. Robertson; captain [colonel?] in the Missouri State Guard; have his commission as such; thirty-four years old; prisoner of war.

Question. Were you taken prisoner at Milford, and who commanded the forces there taken?

Answer. I was. I commanded them.

Question. Was the accused there? Was he armed? Did he constitute any part of your forces or take any part against the United States on that occasion?

Answer. Yes, sir. He was not armed that I saw. None whatever that I saw.

Question. State whether you reported to General Pope the accused as a colonel constituting part of your force.

Answer. I did not, sir.

Question. Did you ever make such report to any officer of the United States?

Answer. I did not.

{p.346}

Question. Did you ever regard the accused at that place as being any part of your force or in any respect subject to your orders?

Answer. I did not, sir.

Question. State, first, the date of the surrender; second, the amount of your entire force; and, third, the whole number of the prisoners taken.

Answer. The 19th of December, 1861. About 750 was the number I started out with from Grand Pass, Saline County. The number of prisoners taken as near as I could ascertain was 684 officers and privates sworn in. There were some citizens; the number I don’t know-some fifteen or twenty that fell in with me.

Question. Did you know the accused prior to the battle of Carthage? Do you know whether he was in that battle and in what capacity he acted?

Answer. I did not, sir. I was there but did not know whether he was in that battle or not. I was second lieutenant of the Saline Mounted Rifles, in Parsons command.

Question. State whether you have ever seen the accused in connection with Price’s army at any time, and where and in what capacity.

Answer. I have. The first I saw of him in Price’s army was at Lexington. I never saw him before. I could not state in what capacity he was only from a handbill I saw at Lexington. The handbill spoke of him as colonel. He was authorized to arm and equip a regiment by General Price.

Question. While the accused was a prisoner at Lexington do you know of any arrangement made for his exchange? If so what and by whom?

Answer. I do not know of any such arrangement.

Question. How far from Grand Pass to your camp at Milford?

Answer. About forty miles as near as I can estimate.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where and when did you first see the accused on or about the 19th of December, 1861?

Answer. Just before the surrender; 2 o’clock in the afternoon. I saw him about eighty yards in the rear of my lines coming from the direction of the creek. He was afoot to the best of my recollection.

Question. How many recruits did you get on your way to Milford from Grand Pass and how many at Milford?

Answer. I received two on my way from Grand Pass to Milford. I swore into the service three at Milford.

Question. By men sworn in and taken as prisoners do you or not exclude camp-followers, sympathizers and citizens generally found in your camp?

Answer. I exclude them all when I say 684 prisoners sworn in were taken.

Question. How many of your men were armed?

Answer. I could not state the exact number but about 250.

Question. Do you know whether the accused had anything to do with the conference before the surrender or whether he was consulted in regard thereto?

Answer. He was not consulted in regard to it at all.

Question. Do you know the number of camp-followers, sympathizers and citizens who were captured with your command or who were about camp the day of your surrender?

{p.347}

Answer. About fifteen or twenty which added to the 684 makes about 700 prisoners. This is about the number to the best of my recollection. Speaking of my men I mean all that were enrolled; some may not have been sworn in. I exclude negroes. The force was on its way to join Price.

The testimony of the witness was read to him by the judge-advocate and he then requested permission to add to his answer to question 5 by accused as follows:

In giving the names of my force to the commanding officer at McDowell’s College Prison in Saint Louis I reported Colonel Magoffin as traveling with my command.

C. B. ALEXANDER, colonel, Missouri State Guard, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, age, rank (if any) and present condition.

Answer. Charles B. Alexander; colonel in Missouri State Guard; thirty-two; prisoner of war.

Question. Were you taken prisoner at Milford? What was your rank in command there? Who had chief command of the forces to which you belonged?

Answer. Yes, sir; lieutenant-colonel; Colonel Robertson had the chief command at Milford.

Question. Was the accused there? If so did he constitute any part of the forces to which you belong? Was he armed? Did he take any part on that occasion in consultation or action against the United States?

Answer. He was there, but did not constitute any part of the force. He was not armed. I did not see him take any part or know of his taking any part.

Question. State any knowledge you may have of the connection of the accused with the State guard.

Answer. He has been with them. I saw him at Carthage, or near there; don’t recollect whether it was after the fight or before it and don’t know whether he had any position or not or what capacity he was in. I was told at Lexington that he had a commission in the army. The accused himself told me that he had a commission. At Cassville I offered the accused the position as major in my regiment, either in the latter part of September or the first of October. He refused me telling me that it would conflict with his commission as a colonel in the army. He expected that some of his men would be there shortly, or that he would return to Pettis County to recruit. The last place I saw the accused was at Pineville in about the latter part of October or the 1st of November, on the road to Osceola.

Question. You say you were second in command at Milford. Did you ever report to any officer of the United States the accused as a colonel or as any part of the forces there taken?

Answer. No, sir; Colonel Robertson had the reporting.

Question. Do you know anterior to the prosecution or did you hear the accused say whether he had recruited forces for the army in the counties of Pettis and Saline?

(Objection to this question was made by a member of commission. The commission was cleared for deliberation and when the door was reopened the decision of the Commission was announced that the words “or did you hear accused say” should be stricken out.)

Answer. I understood that was the case, but I was not in Pettis County or among the recruits.

Question. Did you know Capt. E. H. Magoffin, the son of the accused? If so state whether he joined the army of Price; if so whether he carried a force with him and where did he join with his force.

{p.348}

Answer. Yes, sir; he did join the army of Price. He carried a company of men with him raised in Pettis County and joined the army near Fort Scott, near Dry Wood. He entered my regiment. This was in August as well as I recollect.

Question. Do you know about when it was that the accused was taken at Georgetown? State how long before or after the capture was it that Capt. E. H. Magoffin joined the army with his force raised in Pettis County.

Answer. I do not know the precise date. It was as well as I recollect near the 1st of August. It was some time about the middle part of August that the captain joined me. The capture of the father was before the joining of the son, as the latter told me of it on his way out.

Question. Did any other company from Pettis County join the army about that time?

Answer. Yes, sir; a company under Captain Staples; one under Captain McCarey.

Question. Did you know whether Colonel Price, the son of the general, was under orders raising recruits and supplies in the counties of Saline and Pettis just before the capture of accused at Georgetown?

Answer. Yes, sir; I knew that he was in Saline but don’t know whether he was in the county of Pettis or not. I had a communication from Colonel Price while he was in Saline County.

Question. What was then your official position in the army of Price?

Answer. I was a captain in the army.

Question. Do you know officially as an officer in Price’s army whether the accused was or not at that time recruiting and raising supplies for the army in connection with Colonel Price?

Answer. I can’t answer that question positively; I do not know officially.

Question. Were you at that time yourself engaged in recruiting or furnishing supplies?

Answer. I was, sir.

Question. State whether in communications passing from officer to officer in the army of Price the accused was or not reported to be engaged in that service?

Answer. Yes, sir; he was reported to be engaged in that service. It was so reported by officers-that is in communications from Colonel Price to me as a recruiting officer.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. When and where did you first see the accused on or about the 19th of December, 1861?

Answer. I first saw him on the evening before the surrender on the 18th some ten miles on the route from Grand Pass to Milford. He joined us at that time. The first I saw of him he rode up to the camp. The next time I saw him was at the surrender. I saw him a few minutes after the surrender or about that time.

Question. Was the accused under your eye during the whole action at Milford?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. How many unarmed recruits did you receive the day you were encamped near Milford?

Answer. I don’t know as I received any. None reported to me.

Question. How many of your men were unarmed?

Answer. Between 300 and 400. They were close about there keeping behind trees and out of the way.

{p.349}

Question. How many camp-followers, sympathizers and citizens were in your camp near Milford besides the men regularly enrolled?

Answer. Well, sir, it was impossible to tell; there might have been 10, 15 or 20 or 100. They had no uniforms and only knew the citizens when roll was called.

Question. Do you know whether the accused took any part in or was consulted as to the surrender at Milford?

Answer. I do not, sir.

Question. Did you have any conversation with the accused at any time at camp near Milford or before your arrival there?

Answer. I think we had some little conversation on the first evening he came up to me. I have no recollection of the conversation other than asking how his wife was. He was not armed; had no gun-at least saw no arms about him.

The testimony given by the witness was read to him by the judge-advocate and he was dismissed.

WALTER ROBERTSON, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, age and present position.

Answer. Walter Robertson; thirty years; prisoner of war.

Question. Were you taken prisoner at Milford? In what capacity did you there act?

Answer. I was. I was acting as private secretary and temporary aide to my brother, the colonel.

Question. State whether the accused was armed at Milford; whether he constituted any part of the forces to which you belonged; whether he took any part against the United States on that occasion.

Answer. He was not armed to my knowledge; he was not armed during the fight. I saw him during the fight but not previously. Ho did not constitute any part of the forces that I know of; I saw him take no part against the United States. I was passing from one company to another from different parts of the field and saw him sitting on his horse-he was in the timber a little back rather to the rear of where the forces were stationed; when I saw him he was sitting alone to the best of my recollection. He was within 75 or 100 yards where a portion of our men was stationed. Ho was not armed; no gun.

The testimony given by the witness was read to him by the judge-advocate and he was dismissed.

The commission then adjourned to meet to-morrow, February 19, 1862, at 10 a.m.

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February 19, 1862-10 a.m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of yesterday were being read by the judge-advocate to the commission when at the suggestion of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with.

SAMUEL H. BROWN, a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. What is your name, age, residence and rank (if any)?

Answer. Samuel H. Brown; twenty-nine years old; Pettis County, Mo., near Georgetown; no rank; am a farmer.

{p.350}

Question. If you know anything of a disturbance which took place in Georgetown in August last when a portion of the U. S. soldiers and home guards entered that village, state all that you know and as far as may be in the order in which it occurred.

Answer. I was in Georgetown the latter part of August and as I was leaving town (I had gone there for some physic) I discovered some armed men riding into town from the west. On discovering those men I rode back to meet them to see who they were. Found them to be Magoffin and some twelve or fifteen other men. I suppose them to be so; I did not count them. I understood that day before going to town that there were to be some Federal troops there that day. My mother was in town that day, and when I learned that Mr. Magoffin was there with armed men I went to her for the purpose of getting her to leave town before the Federal forces should get there. Just as she had mounted her horse the report was that they were coming (alluding to the Federal forces coming into town). I then told her to get off and run into a house, feeling that it was unsafe for her to start on horseback from the town at that time or to be on the street. I then hitched my horse to the court-horse fence. While hitching the horses Mr. Magoffin came to the corner for the purpose of getting his horse. Just as he was in the act of mounting three of the Federal officers, or men of the troops at least, turned the opposite corner of the court-house square-that is the northeast corner of square. As they turned a corner there was a pistol fired by one of them-I could not tell which-and about half way of the court-house square there was another fire. There were two shots nearly or quite together. I could not say the second fire was by the soldiers; I could not say by whom. At the time of those two fires when half way of the court-house square there was one of the Federals wounded or shot. This soldier who was shot at that time his horse turned to the left, the northwest corner of court-house square. Well, there was after or about the time he turned several shots fired. My attention was then attracted by a fourth soldier or officer (I don’t know which he was) on horseback who was some thirty or forty yards in the rear of the other three. This fourth man as he turned the northeast corner his attention was attracted to the opposite corner by the firing (I suppose it was; I can’t tell that), and he came along with his pistol presented right at that corner. I was standing there myself. This fourth man passed round the northwest corner. I went then to my mother who was still in the street and took her to the hotel. Then it was confusion pretty much after that. By that time there was 100 or more Federal troops in the town passing in every direction. I was standing at the northwest corner of court-house square when all this occurred-right at the corner; it might have been some six or eight feet south of the corner.

Question. Did you or not remain at your position at the northwest corner until you went to your mother and took her to the hotel?

Answer. I did. From the time I went there to hitch my horse until the fourth man passed I did not change my position.

Question. How far were you from the accused while you remained at the northwest corner?

Answer. I can’t state that. I was at the time I saw those Federal troops not more than six feet from him.

Question. Did you or not see the accused fire?

Answer. I did not see him fire.

Question. Could you tell where-that is from what direction-the two shots nearly at the same time came?

Answer. One of them was to my left, a little in the rear, judging from the report. I only state that from the report. I should judge that the other came from the men-the soldiers.

Question. You say one of the reports came from your left and a little to the rear-which way were you facing them?

Answer. I was facing northeast; would be.

Question. Was the accused south of you on the cross street, or in what direction from you when you say he was in six feet of you?

Answer. When he was six feet from me he was immediately south of me.

{p.351}

Question. You say after the fourth soldier turned the northwest corner there was more firing; could you say Whether they were pistol shots or gun shots?

Answer. I could not, sir.

Question. Did the accused mount his horse? When did you lose sight of the accused after you saw him go to his horse for the purpose of mounting?

Answer. He did not mount his horse. When he attempted to mount his horse his foot slipped or stirrup leather broke and he then fell back further into the cross street to my rear. I lost sight of him when he fell back. I saw Mr. Magoffin again as I was crossing the alley after I had taken my mother to the hotel. I did not see him again until he was arrested.

Question. Did you know whether the wounded soldier who turned the northwest corner had a pistol?

Answer. I can’t say I know that he had a pistol. I picked up a pistol in the street myself between where I stood and this man who was shot. It was a large-sized revolver-a five-shooter I think. I did not examine it; have reason to believe it was the pistol of the man who was shot. I picked it up after returning from the hotel where I left my mother. I pointed it out to another soldier who asked me to hand it to him which I did. I remained in the street-that is going in and out of the doors and in the street-after I come back from the hotel. I did not wish to appear as hiding. I did not examine the pistol.

Question. Do you know whether or not when you saw accused crossing the alley any shots were fired at him?

Answer. I do not, sir

Question. Were the men who came into town from the west armed, and did you see any other body of armed men that day in Georgetown except those men and the U. S. soldiers?

Answer. They were armed. No body of armed men.

Question. Did the accused have a gun?

Answer. He did, sir.

Question. Describe it; and did he have it when you saw him crossing the alley?

Answer. It was a double-barreled shotgun. I don’t think he had it when I saw him crossing the alley. I would not be positive but I don’t think I saw the gun.

Question. Were you present at the time the accused was taken in Kidd’s Hotel? Were you present when the accused was carried before Colonel Day?

Answer. I was not. I was not present when the accused was carried before Colonel Day.

Question. Are you certain that the pistol-shot from one of the soldiers was the first fire made there?

Answer. That was the first firing I heard-that is as the soldiers were turning the corner.

Question. At the time of the pistol-shot-the first fire by one of the soldiers or just before it, or just after-did you hear anything said by the soldiers or any exclamation from them? If so what?

Answer. Just as they were turning the corner some one hallooed, “Here they are;” but don’t know whether that remark came from the soldiers or some one else.

Question. How soon was the fire after that remark?

Answer. Well, it was a very short time.

{p.352}

Question. How many reports of fire-arms do you think you heard during the disturbance?

Answer. Well, sir, I could not say. There was a number of them-say fifteen or twenty shots. The most of the firing was in the western part of town.

Question. Did you ever hear the home guard utter threats against the life of the accused?

Answer. Yes, sir; on the day of this occurrence.

Question. Were any of the home guard there that day in uniform?

Answer. I can’t answer that question positively.

Question. Have you been engaged in raising a company for Colonel Hughes’ regiment?

Answer. Yes, sir; I have been recruiting-attempting it.

Question. Do you know whether the accused was prior to this disturbance engaged in recruiting soldiers for Price’s army?

Answer. Only from general rumor. It was understood through the county that he was-in the community.

Question. State what are your feelings and opinions upon the question of Union or disunion.

Answer. I am decidedly Union.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. What was the distance where you stood from the northeast corner of court-house square.

Answer. I suppose it is eighty yards.

Question. At whom was the first pistol-shot to which you allude fired?

Answer. Well, sir, I could not say at whom it was fired. It was fired up the street at I suppose the men in Main street.

Question. Did you hear the report of two guns?

Answer. Yes, sir; I heard two reports at the same time-very nearly the same time; but could not say whether they were gun reports or pistol reports.

Question. Did you hear one or two reports in the rear of you?

Answer. Well, sir, I heard one report as I remarked to my left in the rear, and the fourth report-that is immediately after I heard the two reports nearly together-to my left, but not in my rear but in the cross street. I judge altogether from the sound.

Question. Of the two reports heard nearly together could you tell which you heard first-the one in your rear or the one in front of courthouse square?

Answer. Well, sir, the one in my rear; that is my impression. I could not say positively but that is my impression.

Question. Were the home guard around Georgetown uniformed at the time of this occurrence or before it?

Answer. Some of them were.

By the COMMISSION:

Question. At the time of the firing on your left and rear how many armed men were near you; and if any how far from you?

Answer. Well, sir, the only armed men I saw near me was the three Federal troops and the one that came up in the rear of them. Those three men could not have been more than forty yards from me. The other man was forty yards behind the other {p.353} three. Those were the only armed men I saw. Three of them were passing at full speed; the other more leisurely. My attention was directed to the main street. Knowing that Mr. Magoffin was near me my attention was directed to the main street.

Question. When you saw the accused at the northwest corner of the court-house square was he armed; if so how?

Answer. He was armed with a double-barreled gun.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. The fourth report you speak of, could you say whether that was from a pistol or gun?

Answer. I believe it was from a gun.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the testimony he had given was read to him by the judge-advocate and he was dismissed. The examination on the part of the defense was here closed.

With a view to give the accused time to prepare his defense the commission at the request of the accused adjourned to meet to-morrow, February 20, 1862, at 12 o’clock,

SAINT LOUIS, MO., February. 20, 1862-12 m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present with the exception of Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer.

The accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, also present.

The proceedings of yesterday were being read to the commission by the judge-advocate when at the suggestion of the commission and the accused the further reading was dispensed with for the reason that the proceedings, being composed entirely of the testimony of Samuel H. Brown, were read to the commission and to the witness just before the adjournment yesterday. The accused then presented his written defense marked H and attached to these proceedings, and which was read by his counsel. The commission was then cleared for deliberation, and having maturely weighed and considered the evidence adduced find the accused, Ebenezer Magoffin, as follows:

Of the specification, first charge, not guilty.

Of the first charge, not guilty.

Of the specification, second charge, guilty.

Of the second charge, guilty.

And the commission does therefore sentence the said Ebenezer Magoffin, of Pettis County, Mo., two-thirds of the commission voting therefor, to be shot to death at such time and place as the commanding officer of this department may direct.

D. S. STANLEY, Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers. RICH’D D. CUTTS, Colonel, U. S. Army, and Judge-Advocate.

Findings and sentence approved.

The sentence will be carried into effect at such time and place as shall be hereafter designated by the general commanding the department. In the meantime the prisoner will be confined in a cell of the military prison at Alton.**

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

* Constituted by Special Orders, No. 81, p. 284. Brig. Gen. D. S. Stanley, U. S. Army, relieved Brig. Gen. S. D. Sturgis, U. S. Army, on this commission in pursuance of Special Orders, No. 59, January 20, 1862, omitted.

** Magoffin subsequently escaped.

{p.354}

A.

I respectfully submit that the plea to the jurisdiction of the court ought to be sustained for the reason that by the Constitution and laws of the land this commission has no right or authority to subject me to trial or punishment for the offense set forth in the specification under charge 1. In the examination of the question raised by the plea it may be assumed that this is not only in form but in fact a government of law, under a written constitution, and the life of no citizen ought to be or can be legally forfeited except in obedience to or by the authority of law. I do not propose to abuse the liberty accorded to me of offering argument in support of the plea by discussing right of arrest during an insurrection or rebellion, or martial law, or any kindred subjects, but shall confine myself as closely as possible to the particular question under consideration.

I, a citizen of the United States, and an inhabitant of the State of Missouri, one of the United States, in a district where the laws of the State are in force and can be executed, am called upon to answer to the charge of murder, not before the judiciary department either of the United States or of the State of Missouri, without presentment or indictment, without a jury and beyond the judicial district in which the offense is alleged to have been committed. Against the exercise of this power I hold up the Constitution of the United States and claim its protection. Article V declares “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, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in active service in time of war or public danger.” It will be perceived that the only cases excepted are those arising in the land or naval forces of the United States or in the militia; and it will not be pretended this case arose in the land or naval forces of the United States. I was never in either nor in the militia. But even in cases arising in the land or naval forces it would not be competent for a military commission to punish for a capital offense without some law to justify it, and therefore by section 8, Article I of the Constitution it is declared that “Congress (and Congress alone) shall have power to make rules and regulations for the government of the land and naval forces’ The offense charged against the undersigned is not embraced in any such rules and regulations, or in the rules and articles of war. The jurisdiction then of the commission is not conferred either by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Where shall we look for it? It may be in the order of the general commanding in this department. But from whence does he derive his authority? If legitimate it must be from the Constitution and laws. If not derived from that source it is respectfully submitted that it is a usurpation of authority that no one either officer or private in the army or out of it is bound to obey. In the brief interval since the adjournment yesterday no opportunity has occurred to examine the general orders of the commandant of this department; yet it is believed that they do declare that the courts (loyal) are not and will not be suppressed but that they will be in aid of the military, and restricts the enforcement of martial law to the city of Saint Louis, the railroads and rivers of the State. I know that the argument offered to sustain the power is “that the life of the Government is in danger; we cannot afford the protection of law to traitors; that necessity is above all law and the safety of the people is the only law.” In American history these are new doctrines, and if they be {p.355} true then this Government is an absolute despotism. Charles I of England thought it necessary to issue commissions to try not only soldiers but other dissolute persons who might commit murder or other outrages, but the Commons of his realm compelled a revocation of such commissions, saying that no man ought to be “judged to death but by the laws established in the realm” and such commissions for the trial of civilians have not existed it is believed either in England or America from the time of Charles to this hour. If I have committed an offense against either the laws of the State of Missouri or of the United States I admit that I may be lawfully called to answer if need be with my life. At the very point where I now am and at the very point where the offense is alleged to have been committed the courts of both the State and Federal governments are open and free with full power and ability to try and punish all offenders. But suppose they were not; suppose an insurrection or rebellion swells into such strength in any district as to defy the ordinary civil tribunals-is the Government then powerless? Must it submit? The answer is it must draw the sword and enforce its authority by the sword. But it by no means follows that military commissions shall issue to try persons not in the land or naval forces for murder or other offenses. The powers of the Government in the case of insurrection and civil war were very fully and ably discussed in the case of Luther v. Borden and others (the Dorr Rebellion in Rhode Island) by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Chief Justice acknowledges the power to arrest but by no means admits the power of the military to try and punish for offenses. It is said “the officers engaged in its military service might lawfully arrest anyone who from information before them was so engaged in the insurrection.” No more force, however, can be used than necessary to accomplish the object (8th Howard, p. 46). The undersigned submits that if the offense with which he is charged can be tried by this commission then any killing whether of soldier or civilian at any point in the State of Missouri may be so tried. Nay, more, that any offense committed in the State may be punished at the discretion of the commission; and if it can be done in Missouri in virtue and by authority of a general order of the commandant of the department so it may be done in New York; and thus it will be determined that during a civil war all civil government may be rightfully suppressed at the discretion of a subordinate military officer, and in place of it a military despotism established, at least during the existence of such civil war. Against such doctrines the undersigned pleads and protests. In the examination of this question it should be remembered that there is a vast difference between a war waged against a foreign people and the military authority of the nation in arms to suppress an insurrection or to put down a rebellion of our own people.

Before General Scott started to Mexico in 1847 as early in fact as May, 1846, he presented for the consideration of the Secretary of War a project for a law giving to courts-martial in an enemy’s country authority to punish offenses which in the United States are punishable by the criminal courts of the land. Congress did not, however, act upon the recommendation, and General Scott afterward, in 1846, submitted to Mr. Marcy, Secretary of State [War], the draft of a letter which he recommended should be dispatched each commander of an army operating in Mexico. “I am aware,” said he, “that it presents grave topics for consideration, which is invited. It will be seen that I have placed all necessary restrictions on martial law: first, by restricting it to a foreign hostile country; second, to offenses enumerated with some {p.356} accuracy; third, by assimilating councils of war to courts-martial; fourth, by restricting punishments to the known laws of some one of the States of the Union.” This project met with no favor from the President. General Taylor in October, 1846, informs the Secretary of War of the “most shameful atrocities” being committed without punishment, and he asks for instructions as to the proper disposition of the culprit in a case of cold-blooded murder at Monterey. Mr. Marcy replied:

The competency of a military tribunal to take cognizance of such a case as you have presented, viz, the murder of a Mexican soldier and other offenses not embraced in the express provisions of the articles of war, was deemed so questionable that application was made to Congress at the last session to bring them expressly within the jurisdiction of such a tribunal, but it was not acted upon.

He adds:

I am not prepared to say that under the peculiar circumstances of the case, and particularly by the non-existence of any civil authority to which the offender could be turned over, a military court could not rightfully act thereon; yet very serious doubts are entertained upon the point and the Government does not advise that course. It seriously regrets that such flagrant offender cannot be dealt with in the manner he deserves. I see no other course for you to pursue than to release him from confinement and send him away from the army and this is recommended. (See Military Dictionary, Scott’s, 659 and 660.)

Now nothing is clearer than that the rules and articles of war went with our army in its invasion of Mexico. If they did not provide for the trial by a military tribunal of an American soldier who in a foreign country murdered a Mexican soldier in cold blood how can it be that in the United States where the civil tribunals have exclusive jurisdiction of such offenses that a military tribunal can claim to try a citizen for the murder of a soldier? This view is enforced by the celebrated Order No. 287, issued by General Scott on the 17th of September, 1847, from the National Palace in Mexico. (See Scott’s Military Dictionary, p. 383 et seq.)

Under the head “Law,” page 382, I submit to the court the following extracts:

Within the United States therefore the effect of a declaration of martial law would not be to subject citizens to trial by courts-martial, but it would involve simply a suspension of the writ of habeas corpus under the authority given in second clause of section 9 of the Constitution, viz: “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless-when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” The suspension of this privilege would enable a commander to incarcerate all dangerous citizens, but when brought to trial the citizen would necessarily come before the ordinary civil courts of the land. (Page 383.)

There is not perhaps a finer military statute on record, and its author bases his right to establish military tribunals for the trial of offenses exclusively upon the ground that he is in a foreign country and out of the reach of the civil tribunals which in a government of law and order would have exclusive jurisdiction over them. So reluctant was General Scott to encroach upon the action of the civil tribunals of Mexico that in section 13 of his order he provides:

That the administration of justice both in civil and criminal matters through the ordinary courts of the country shall nowhere and in no degree be interrupted by any officer or soldier of the American forces except, first, in cases to which an officer, soldier, agent, servant or follower of the American Army may be a party; second, in political cases-that is prosecutions against other individuals on the allegation that they have given friendly information, aid or assistance to the American forces. (See p. 385, Scott’s Dictionary.)

This is a proceeding not under martial law but military-law, and it is settled even in England that the military law does in no respect {p.357} either supersede or interfere with the civil law of the realm and the military is in general subordinate to the latter. (Tyler on Military Law, 365.) The Articles of War do not provide for such a case for they are confined strictly to military matters even on a soldier himself, and cannot be exercised even against a soldier by an officer except in such matters and about which the officer has the right to order him. So zealous has been England in such cases that Governor Wall was executed in England after the lapse of twenty years for flogging (so that he died) a soldier for an offense not military, and by a pretended court-martial not full. If I have been guilty of the offense charged I have violated the law of this State, and am amenable to the judgment of the court which by the Constitution is appointed to take jurisdiction of my case. If I am cleared of this charge by this tribunal the acquittal here will not aid me before the State court. If I am acquitted I cannot plead the acquittal in bar of an indictment found by a grand jury of Pettis County.

Lastly the charge in substance is murder. Now by what standard can this tribunal determine the offense? By the law of this State murder is divided into two degrees, and manslaughter into four. By the criminal court of the United States there is no division of murder or of manslaughter. Will this court make its standard the law of the United States? The United States cannot take jurisdiction of any homicide unless it be committed in a place over which it has exclusive jurisdiction such as forts, dockyards, arsenals or in the Indian country. Congress has no power to provide for a homicide committed in a State. The subject belongs exclusively to the municipal power of the State. Will this court make its standard the law of the State? This tribunal is no State tribunal; it belongs to no department of power of this State. The State has no power to create this tribunal.

If I have in my comments upon the power and jurisdiction of the commission in any respect overstepped the limits accorded to me I crave the indulgence and pardon of the commission. The position in which I am placed is without precedent in this Republic; and I may without a blush acknowledge my embarrassment and inability to discuss satisfactorily the great principles involved in my case in the brief time allowed to me.

Respectfully submitted.

EBENEZER MAGOFFIN.

B.

HEADQUARTERS FIFTH DIVISION, Sedalia, Mo., December 14, 1861.

Whereas, Ebenezer Magoffin, formerly a colonel in the Army of the Southern Confederacy, has given his parole of honor that he will not in any manner by word or deed aid, assist or give countenance to the enemies of the United States Government; and whereas, by order of General Halleck said Magoffin is to be permitted to remain at home or vicinity in the quiet unmolested pursuit of his usual peaceful occupations, I therefore order all officers and soldiers of the U. S. Army to give him protection, and by this safeguard he is protected in person and property so long as he remains in the quiet pursuit of his ordinary business in same manner as other loyal citizens of the United States.

By order of Col. F. Steele, commanding Fifth Division, Army of the West:

E. B. BROWN, Lieutenant-Colonel, Quartermaster and Acting Aide-de-Camp.

{p.358}

C.

PRAIRIE LEA, [December] 16, 1861.

Doctor HUGHES.

DEAR SIR: You were at my house last night and left with me a written pass. Previously I had accepted one, which does not expire until the 20th day of this month. It was understood that I had until that time to deliberate the proposition made by Colonel Brown and yourself concerning the parole. I am deeply grateful to you both for the kindness you have shown me; it was generous and disinterested. But reliable information has reached me to-day from two sources that a conspiracy has been made to assassinate me in my home. Reluctantly I am compelled to leave it again. I therefore send you back the pass you left with me. I cannot accept it. I must express again my sincere gratitude to yourself and Colonel Brown for your kindness, and regret that circumstances have frustrated your friendly purposes and that I am compelled to leave a young and helpless family to the mercy of my enemies.

Truly, your friend,

B. MAGOFFIN.

D.

In reply to the notice received by me from Col. B. D. Cutts, judge-advocate, to produce for the purpose of evidence the first written safeguard issued by Colonel Brown, I have to say that the paper is not in my possession or power and I am unable to produce it. It was not delivered to me by Colonel Brown and I am not certain that I ever saw it. If I ever had it it was lost among other papers of mine. My perturbation of mind at the period when the paper was written and the affliction which followed were such as to render me uncertain whether I ever saw it.

EBENEZER MAGOFFIN.

E.

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CENTRAL MISSOURI, Otterville, December 23, 1861.

Capt. J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

CAPTAIN: I have the honor to report that having replaced by troops from La Mine the garrison of Sedalia I marched from that place on Sunday, the 15th instant, with a column of infantry, cavalry and artillery numbering about 4,000 men.

On the morning of the 18th Lieutenant-Colonel Brown’s forces rejoined the command. Knowing that there must still be a large force of the enemy north of us I moved slowly on the 18th toward Warrensburg, and when near that town the spies and scouts I had sent before marching from Sedalia in the direction of Lexington, Waverly and Arrow Rock reported to me that a large force was marching from the two latter places and would encamp that night at the mouth of Clear Creek, just south of Milford. I posted the main body of my command near Warrensburg and Knobnoster to close all outlet to the south between those two points and dispatched seven companies of cavalry, five of the First Iowa and two of the Fourth Regular Cavalry, afterward {p.359} re-enforced by another company of regular cavalry and a section of artillery, all under command of Col. J. C. Davis, Indiana volunteers, to march on the town of Milford so as to turn the enemy’s left and rear and intercept his retreat to the southeast, at the same time directing Major Marshall, with Merrill’s regiment of horse, to march from Warrensburg on the same point turning the enemy’s right and rear and forming a junction with Colonel Davis. The main body of my command occupied a point four miles south and ready to advance at a moment’s notice or to intercept the enemy’s retreat south.

Colonel Davis marched promptly and vigorously with the forces under his command, and at a late hour in the afternoon came upon the enemy encamped in the wooded bottom-land on the west side of Blackwater opposite the mouth of Clear Creek. His pickets were immediately driven in across the stream, which was deep, miry and impassable except by a long narrow bridge which the enemy occupied in force as is believed under Colonel Magoffin. Colonel Davis brought forward his force and directed that the bridge be carried by assault. The two companies of the Fourth Regular Cavalry being in advance, under the command respectively of Lieutenant Gordon and Lieutenant Amory, were designated for that service and were supported by the five companies of the First Iowa. Lieutenant Gordon, of the Fourth Cavalry, led the charge in person with the utmost gallantry and vigor, carried the bridge in fine style and immediately formed his company on the opposite side. He was promptly followed by the other companies. The force of the enemy posted at the bridge retreated precipitately over a narrow open space into the woods where his whole force was posted. The two companies of the Fourth Cavalry formed in line at once, advanced upon the enemy and were received with a heavy volley of small-arms, muskets, rifle and shotguns. One man was killed and eight wounded by this discharge, with one exception all belonging to Company D, Fourth Cavalry, Lieutenant Gordon. Lieutenant Gordon himself received several balls through his cap. Our forces still continuing to press forward and the enemy finding his retreat south and west cut off and that he was in presence of a large force and at best could only prolong the contest a short time surrendered at discretion. His force reported by the colonel commanding consisted of parts of two regiments of infantry and three companies of cavalry, numbering in all 1,300 men, among whom there were three colonels (Robertson, Alexander and Magoffin), one lieutenant-colonel (Robertson) and one major (Harris) and fifty-one commissioned company officers.

...

I am, captain, your obedient servant,

JOHN POPE, Brigadier-General, Commanding.

F.

The accused objects to the paper read by the judge-advocate purporting to be an attested copy of an extract from the official report of General Pope to the [assistant] adjutant-general, Kelton-first, because it purports only to be an extract; second, because it is not evidence of the facts therein stated; third, because it is ex parte and can not be evidence against the accused; fourth, because it is only competent testimony to prove the fact that General Pope made a report.

E. MAGOFFIN.

{p.360}

G.

{Map.}

H.

MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN, OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION:

With your leave I now propose to present in brief some considerations in defense against the charges upon which I have been arraigned before you. Whatever may be the result of this trial, whether for me or against me, the investigation is a personal benefit in so far as it has enabled me to free myself from a portion at least of that wholesale and widespread defamation which for a long time has assailed my character as a soldier and a gentleman. I cheerfully admit that this commission at every stage of the trial has evinced a marked disposition to grant me every facility in its power to make and prepare my defense. But it is nevertheless true that I have labored under peculiar difficulties.

The first charge and its specification deny to me the character of “a legitimate belligerent.” I find myself cut off by the absence of witnesses beyond my control or the control of this tribunal from testimony which would directly and unequivocally establish my status in the army in rebellion against the United States. These witnesses, embracing the highest officers from Governor Jackson and General Price down, are out of my reach and beyond the summons of the judge-advocate. I have {p.361} therefore been reduced to the necessity of resorting to subordinate, indirect and circumstantial evidence to prove affirmatively a fact which I thought too notorious to be gravely questioned. I have been connected with the State Guards from the period of the first call by governor Jackson. So soon as I read his proclamation I repaired to Jefferson City and was there ordered and instructed by him to raise a regiment of cavalry to act as scouts in conjunction with Major Staples, then of Georgetown, but now an officer in the Confederate Army in Virginia. This regiment was to be subject to the order of the governor. The force was raised by Major Staples and myself immediately and marched to Boonville under the command of Major Staples, I being detained by the sudden illness of my wife. I joined the retreating State forces before they reached Carthage, fought in that battle and acted in the capacity of aide to Governor Jackson. I was then ordered to return by the governor to raise recruits for the State. He declined giving me any written orders or dispatches on the ground that I might be captured by Sturgis whose position on the Osage was pointed out to me by him, as also that of Lyon. On my arrival at home which was in a few days I at once commenced recruiting in the counties of Pettis, Saline and Cooper which adjoin, and also in Missouri north of the river I raised a company headed by Captain White. At first, when the force amounted to less than 300 men, I was elected its major, and afterward upon the increase of the body I was elected colonel. I was at the same time under the instructions of Colonel Price engaged in raising supplies. The men and the supplies raised by me were to start for the army on such day as Colonel Price should order the march. The men raised by me with the exception of Captain White’s company went under the orders of Colonel Price, and I should have gone with them but for the fact that I was summoned as a witness to Fort Leavenworth in behalf of Mr. John J. Jones in a suit of great importance which detained me four or five days.

On my return home all of my recruits had marched with the exception of twelve men, part of Captain White’s company, who were waiting the arrival of the balance of the company across the Missouri River. The next day after my return I carried these men to Georgetown with the view of furnishing them some supplies which they needed. My capture at that village followed and I was carried as a prisoner to Lexington. On the fall of Lexington I was at once commissioned by General Price a colonel with instructions to raise a regiment of infantry and began recruiting on the spot. I recruited many men. Some of the recruits were cut off by the U. S. forces before they joined the army. I was with the army from that period until the intelligence came of the illness of my wife when I received a permit to return home, but with instructions to continue recruiting as soon as the health of my wife would enable me to do so. The leave of absence and the instructions were given to me by General Price in person. But for my capture I should have been at the battle of Dry Wood, and at Lexington an assailant not a prisoner. This in brief is a true history of my connection with the army. I have never been other than a legitimate belligerent. I am and have ever been opposed to guerrilla warfare. I have never engaged in it nor given it the slightest countenance. My influence and my actions have been to put down marauding or bandit war. No living man can truly charge me with having conducted hostilities in a manner unbecoming a soldier or a gentleman. I used my influence to have disbanded the camp at Blackwater organized for self-defense against the home guards, and many men thus disbanded were {p.362} recruited by me into the regular service of the State. The commission will readily see how much of this history is supported by the evidence.

I proceed to notice the first charge: “Killing in violation of the laws of war.”

The first averment necessary to support the charge is that I was not a legitimate belligerent. I suppose the rule to be in this tribunal as elsewhere that the prosecution must prove the charge-prove it clearly. Has this been done? The proof offered by the prosecution consists, first, in showing that I was not in uniform-wore no military badge to distinguish me from a civilian. Such proof would make illegitimates of more than half of all soldiers now in arms against the United States. It would prove that our fathers who fought at Concord and Lexington and Bunker Hill were illegitimates, not to mention the home guards. Second. The testimony of Colonel Day, who represents me as disclaiming any connection with the army when I was a prisoner surrounded by infuriated home guards and some of his cavalry soldiers who were clamoring for my blood to be shed there by them and he using his best exertions to prevent the deed. Out of this moment of violence, confusion and fury comes the only direct evidence which the prosecution offers to give color to the charge. According to all writers this is the weakest of all evidence known to the law. Starkie says of it:

Of an kinds of evidence that of extra-judicial and casual observations is the weakest and most unsatisfactory. Such words are often spoken without serious intention, and they are always liable to be mistaken and misremembered and their meaning is liable to be misapprehended and exaggerated. A hearer is apt to clothe the ideas of the speaker as he understands them, and by this translation the real meaning must often be lost. A witness too who is not entirely indifferent between the parties will frequently without being conscious that he does so give too high a coloring to what has been said. (Starkie’s Evidence, vol. 1, page 461, top side page 462, and note.)

That Colonel Day can be mistaken is a very patent fact developed by the testimony. His mistakes are numerous of things more palpable than words uttered amidst a scene of uproar and confusion. I would not I do not impeach the integrity of the witness. At that scene and at another in Sedalia he was under the dominion of feelings which pushed him into improprieties of speech and bearing toward me which I am sure his calmer judgment does not approve. But while these feelings were eminently calculated to cause him to misjudge, misinterpret and misunderstand me I am not willing to believe that he has sworn to any intentional error. He was, however, mistaken-unequivocally mistaken. No human being ever heard me deny my connection with the army. I was a rebel on principle; never did disguise the fact and do not now. In the unhappy civil feud of my country I took sides from the outbreak of rebellion in this State and all men who know me know my position. I may have said to Colonel Day that I had no commission-that is no documentary evidence of it-in the Missouri State Guard. I might with truth also have said I had no place in the Confederate Army for at that time I had never seen any of the Confederate Army in this State. But beyond that all is error and misunderstanding on the part of Colonel Day.

Opposed to this evidence I have affirmatively shown the following facts:

First. I was in the battle of Carthage. Received prisoners and acted as aide to General Jackson. This battle was fought about the 10th of July.

{p.363}

Second. In August and in the month of July I was recruiting in the counties of Pettis, Saline, Cooper and across the Missouri.

Third. I raised a force of between 200 and 300 men, and part of that consisting of three companies marched and joined the army of Price in August.

Fourth. I was elected major by that force after it was raised. I have not been able to prove that I was elected colonel by it after its increase.

Fifth. Colonel Price in August had been sent in to raise recruits and furnish supplies. He was a colonel in the army of General Price. Captain Alexander of the army was engaged in the same service. In communications between Colonel Price and Captain Alexander, addressed to the latter as recruiting officer, Colonel Price recognized me as a recruiting officer of the army and stated the theater of my operations.

Sixth. Colonel Day testifies that among the officers of the United States at Jefferson City the fact of my connection with the army was notorious and that was the reason why I was not on the list of marked persons to be arrested while on the march of his detachment to Lexington.

Seventh. While a prisoner at Lexington negotiations for my exchange for prisoners held by General Price took place and the U. S. officer, Colonel Marshall, objected to the exchange on the ground that I was in arms against the United States and was therefore no fair exchange for civilians.

Eighth. So soon as my liberation took place a commission of colonel of an infantry regiment was given me and I at once entered upon the new service and was with the army of Price till summoned back by the extreme illness of my wife.

Ninth. On the day of my capture at Georgetown I had still under my command a portion of the recruits raised at the period when Colonel Price was in [sic], and when my name as a recruiting officer was mentioned in the communications official between him and Captain Alexander.

Tenth. It was notorious that I was connected with the army as recruiting officer at Georgetown and Sedalia among civilians and soldiers.

Eleventh. Colonel Hughes establishes the fact that the recruits I had raised were encamped on my own land in force so large that a force of 500 men were detailed to capture my command.

The actual exhibition of a paper commission is not essential to the status even of an officer in the army, though it constitutes when accessible the highest evidence of the fact in a regularly organized army. It will be remembered by the commission that at Boonville and Carthage there was no regular organization of the forces in rebellion-scarcely more than existed at Concord or Lexington on the outbreak of the Revolution. The evidence to establish the status of officer or soldier must have respect to the character of the force raised and its organization. The battle of Carthage was as I have said on the 10th of July. The amount of service rendered by me from that period to the affair at Georgetown, embracing a little more than forty days, shows that I was no idler. Even up to the present period I suppose the organization of the rebel army in this State is imperfect. I submit that the proof does not clearly or satisfactorily show that I was not a legitimate belligerent.

The second averment in the specification is that the killing was “wanton and malicious.” This is wholly unsupported by the proof. The attack was made by Federal soldiers; they began the firing. The proof {p.364} is overwhelming to that fact. There is a conflict of proof among the three witnesses for the prosecution-Satterwhite, Simpson and Colonel Day-as to the circumstances under which the firing occurred, while every witness in the cause is in conflict with the testimony of Colonel Day. Satterwhite says there were two reports of fire-arms, though he saw but one. Simpson says there was but one and he saw it all. Colonel Day admits more firing. The statement of Colonel Day of a body of armed men, fifteen or twenty in number, chased for one-half a mile or three-quarters of a mile on the road leading to Sedalia is not only without support but against the testimony of every witness in the cause. No such body of men was seen that day at or near Georgetown. The men under my command entered the town from the west an hour before the entrance of the Federal soldiers and they had not left it when the cavalry entered it. He is obviously mistaken as to the point at which his soldiers and himself entered the town. The conjoint testimony of Thompson, Sanders and the two Browns establish (if human testimony can do it) two facts: first, that the attack was made by the Federal soldiers; second, that they were first to begin the fire. It is equally clear that the charge of firing was at me and my command. A firing in defense of such attack cannot be called either wanton or malicious without a flagrant abuse of language. It was not done in “wantonness,” for homicide except for justifiable cause is abhorrent to my nature. It was not done in “malice” for I did not know him nor had I ever seen him or heard that he had done me or mine previous wrong.

Some injustice has been done me unintentionally by a misapprehension of Colonel Hughes in regard to our conversation at Sedalia when he kindly visited me while under guard. He did not ask nor did I give him a detail of the circumstances that transpired at Georgetown. He says he took it for granted that I took it for granted he, Colonel Hughes, knew all about the circumstances. Our conversation as he says was constrained, being in the presence of an officer. At one period of his testimony he says that I said, “I would not have shot if I had thought they were U. S. troops or soldiers.” Again in repeating the conversation he says I said, “I would have surrendered if I had thought they were U. S. soldiers.” Here is a double misapprehension. As to the shooting I told him distinctly (as he admits) that I shot in self-[defense] to save my own life. The other phrase, “surrender,” had no reference to the shooting whatever. It had exclusive reference to the scene in Kidd’s Hotel. I had gained the attic of the hotel and was pursued by a crowd. I was armed with a revolver and they could not reach me without peril to the lives of six of them. I thought it was their purpose to kill me on the spot, and I had resolved to die there selling my life as dearly as I could. They told me to come down. I refused and they did not think proper to ascend to me. I refused to surrender to them without an express understanding that I was to be treated as a prisoner of war and protected from violence. They at last agreed to my terms. Now the idea I attempted to convey was not that I would have surrendered to the U. S. soldiers on their entrance or dash into the town-not at all, for I never thought of such a thing-but that when approached in the attic I would have readily surrendered there without resistance if I had been dealing exclusively with U. S. soldiers for from them I did not anticipate violence. This misapprehension has led to the inquiry by the president of the commission and the judge-advocate whether at that time the home guards were in uniform. If my words had been understood in their proper context it is obvious the inquiry could have no significance. If it shall be held {p.365} otherwise it appears from the proof that some of the home guard were in uniform before that period; but I had been away recruiting and at Leavenworth and had not seen a home guard for a long time, so that in fact I did not know whether they wore uniform or not. It was my first visit to Georgetown for a long time and it was the last I expected to make for some time to come, as my purpose was to leave for the army with my recruits. Of course I expected a larger force than had appeared at the time I shot. I had been informed by my men who went to look from the top of the court-house of a big dust coming in the direction from Sedalia. When so informed I sent two scouts on horseback to the brow of the hill which overlooks the Sedalia road for accurate information. Besides I could not conceive of an attack which embraced only three or four assailants. My expectations are justified by the actual proof of a large force.

I think I may fairly claim from the commission an acquittal of the first material averment of the specification to the first charge. If I was a legitimate belligerent I had the right according to all the laws of war to repel such attack when made. If I was not a legitimate belligerent the right of self-defense is not denied to a civilian. In either case the shooting by me was neither wanton nor malicious.

The third material fact averred in the specification is the “killing of George W. Glasgow, a sergeant,” &c. There is no proof in the cause establishing the given name of the soldier who was killed. In the civil courts of the country the absence of such proof would be fatal to the prosecution. I know not how a military commission acts in such case; but I cannot stoop to any technical defense. My life has been manly and shall be so to the end. I put my defense to this charge on higher grounds. If my shot killed the sergeant-a fact which I do not know and perhaps never will know-I insist that I killed him in conformity to the laws of war and the universally recognized laws of self-defense.

The second charge touches me more nearly than the first for it involves my honor which I hold dearer than my life. I have lived to the age of -, and no human being can truly say that I ever knowingly forfeited my word.

Second charge: Violation of parole. The first material averment of the specification necessary to support the charge is that “on about the 10th day of December I gave my parole of honor not to resume-arms against the Government of the United States in consideration of having received a safeguard dated the 10th day of December.” Is this averment supported by the proof? It is not pretended that this alleged parole was given at any other place or time than at the house of Colonel Hughes on the interview between Colonel Brown and myself on the night of the 9th of December. The only two witnesses introduced by the prosecution on this subject were Colonel Brown and Colonel Hughes. They are both gentlemen of the highest integrity and they are at substantial variance on the point in question. Colonel Brown says I gave my parole. “I took his verbal parole that he would not in the meantime take up arms against the United States nor give information to the enemy.” Colonel Hughes says with equal affirmation that I gave no verbal parole and with marked emphasis he says that he was present and heard the whole conversation between Colonel Brown and myself from the time the subject was broached to its close. It will be remembered that no safeguard was written at that interview. A practical safeguard to my home was furnished by both gentlemen who conducted me in safety to my wife. Colonel Hughes did not know what a parole was. He confounded it with a wholly different thing-a passport or {p.366} safeguard granted by a military officer in authority, which may or may not be the consideration of a prior parole or promise made to the officer by the recipient of the safeguard. The one is a promise made the other a privilege granted, and they may be dependent or independent of each other. When the nature of a parole was explained to the witness by the president of the commission he at once declared that no such promise was made by me at that interview.

If I could settle this variance of the two respectable and honorable gentlemen by any memory of mine in that interview I would do it no matter what peril to me might follow. But I cannot. My mind was in a paroxysm. In the whirl of the soul which then stirred me I remember only two prominent ideas-one was a burning wish to see my dying wife, and as to another matter they presented to me about an arrangement with the Government time was given me to make up my mind. I was consciously incapable of connected thought-I think they said ten days. If anything passed there beyond the privilege to see and be with my wife and the further privilege of ten days to determine my future course it made no impression upon me that survived the moment. I know I felt grateful to the Government officers for the generous kindness they evinced for me in deep dejection of soul-the deepest of my life. It was as unexpected as it was kind, for I had given up all hope of such favor except upon a condition impossible for me-that is a precedent oath of allegiance to a government from which I rebelled on principle and a conscientious conviction of duty. Hence I took the peril of the fire of sentinels and pickets to snatch momentary interviews with my wife. This much I will say that no consideration could have induced me to take up arms against the Government while I was receiving so great favor from it. I will say also that if Colonel Brown asked me whether I in the meantime-that is while I was permitted to stay at home-or during the period of time allowed me to make up my mind as to what arrangement I would make with the Government would agree not to take up arms against the Government I have no doubt if I understood him that I answered in the affirmative. It is not pretended that I gave any parole at my house that night after I was conducted there. Nor can it be justly urged that I gave any parole on the subsequent occasion when Colonel Hughes brought me the second safeguard. He was not authorized to take it but he acquits me of giving any promise or parole except the constructive one which [he] says he implied from the supposition that I accepted the safeguard. To the last Colonel Hughes did not succeed in ridding his mind of the confusion involved by confounding two things so essentially different as a parole and a safeguard.

This acceptance of the second paper as an absolute and final adjustment with the Government is an error also produced from taking things for granted which were not expressed. He admits I never said I accepted it. The fact is manifest to me now that Colonel Hughes interpreted every expression or act of mine in any degree equivocal during that period by the standard of his feelings. He was, had been and I believe still is my friend, and I am proud of his friendship. He disapproved of the course I felt it to be my duty to take in our present unhappy domestic war. He ardently desired me to be once more at peace with the Government and his desires led him to deductions and inferences which he would not have made in dealing with one indifferent to him. He knew well that I would not take the oath of allegiance even to be by the bedside of a dying wife whose life was a part of mine. But when I said there are strong and powerful reasons why I should {p.367} stay at home he infers hastily but kindly that I am in a condition of mind to accept whatever terms the Government might exact as the condition of my security. He has confounded an inference with a fact. It is a total misconception of me when [he] says I asked him to procure a perpetual safeguard for me. He admits that I never said a word about the terms on which I would remain at home permanently nor did he. So that in the dark his ardent friendship for me induced the conclusion that I had made up my mind to take a safeguard without regard to its terms or conditions. I did not know what terms the Government would impose. Really wishing to remain if I could consistently with my principles and my honor I felt a strong desire to know what the Government would do or propose. The ten days were expiring and I wished to see and consider the terms of whatever arrangement should be proposed. I remember the solicitude I felt as to the contents of the paper when I asked him to read it. I had not read it when he left nor examined and considered the stipulations. I had not a shadow of doubt that I had the full period of days to consider and determine a matter of so great moment. And when I returned the safeguard having ultimately resolved on my course I thought the negotiation was at an end, and in my opinion the relations between myself and the Government were the same as before the negotiations were begun.

The commission will remember that the distinct understanding of the officers, Colonels Steele and Brown, was that a failure to come to terms would place me back in the position of an enemy to the Government. I had no doubt that when I returned the safeguard I had the right to act as the enemy of the Government. But I wished to avoid all semblance of unfair bearing toward the officers who had voluntarily done me a great kindness and I resolved to take no step of hostility to the Government until the expiration of the ten days. But I submit to the consideration of the commission whether I was in such relation to the Government of the United States as to be the subject of a parole of honor in the sense and meaning of the law martial so as to become the object of a criminal prosecution. I was not a prisoner. I was the open enemy of the Government and an officer in the army at war with the Government. Without my knowledge upon the voluntary solicitation of Colonel Hughes, a friend of the Government and also my personal friend, the Government upon its own motion sought an interview with me proclaiming that I should have the privilege to pass in and out of its lines, and if no arrangement was made mutually satisfactory to the Government and myself that I should be where I was before the interview-an enemy still-the Government taking no advantage of me by reason of its acquired knowledge of my whereabouts derived from the interview. Can the Government upon any military usage treat me as a criminal in such a state of facts even if I had been mean enough not to respond by my action to the magnanimity the Government extended to me?

In defining to the witness Colonel Hughes the nature of a parole of honor the president of the commission said it was a promise on honor made by a prisoner to some competent military officer authorized to takeit. As far as I have been able to inform myself this definition is correct. The essential element of a parole is a promise given by one in the power of the Government by virtue or in consideration of which the Government may relax that power or modify its exercise. I was not in the power of the Government at the time. The Government distinctly recognized that fact; but acting under the promptings of a high humanity it chose voluntarily to extend to me, an enemy, a kindness, {p.368} resolving to take no advantage of me even if its generous action should turn out to be misplaced. I submit that this view is conclusive to the result that there is no power in the court to treat me as a criminal under the second charge. But my honor is involved as a gentleman and soldier that I clear myself of all imputation of improper action touching the peculiar relation between myself and the Government arising out of the action of the Government toward me. I recognized then and do now the delicacy of that relation, and I insist that my conduct was entirely consistent with the most romantic standard of honor. It will be conceded by the commission that it is of the essence of every breach of parole that it should be intentional; that the party charged with the breach should have fully understood the nature of his obligation and with that knowledge broken it. Before the world I solemnly declare that I would have surrendered my life before breaking intentionally any known obligation to the Government arising out of the circumstances by which I was carried to the bedside of a dying wife. Never for a moment had I any other understanding of what passed between the officers of the Government and myself than that it was my privilege to determine what should be my future relation to the United States, and that I had the time of ten days to decide the question. Torn by conflicting motives strong and powerful in their antagonism I decided, and sent back the safeguard sent to me by the Government through the same channel by which it came. At that moment I believed the negotiation or conference ended and that I stood on the precise ground occupied by me at the moment of the interview at Colonel Hughes’ residence where I met the officer of the United States. I am satisfied now from the testimony of Colonels Brown and Hughes that they interpreted the negotiation differently, but I am proud to believe that neither of those gentlemen deem me capable of violating a known obligation.

It is not important that I should analyze the processes through which my mind went before the decision was finally made. The peril which surrounded me at home was better understood by me than by the officers of the United States. I had knowledge of danger unknown to them. I remembered and shall not soon forget the scenes of Georgetown. I remember too events earlier in point of time than the day of my capture as well as others more recent, coming up to the period of my final determination. I felt that the post at Sedalia was no security for me. I remembered how unavailing were the efforts of the officers of the United States to save from cold-blooded assassination Judge Richardson at Canton, and I know that my peril must be as great as his own. I did not doubt the will of the U. S. officers to save me from the hands of violence but I doubted and still doubt their power to save me from the shot of an assassin. I broke no parole express or implied. A parole express or implied imposes no obligation except during its continuance. Whenever it expires by its own limitations or by the option of the party giving it all of its obligations cease. My determination ended all parole. The time given was for my benefit not that of the Government. If at the hour when I laid my wife in her grave I had decided not to make an arrangement with the Government at that instant all parole constructive or express expired and left me free to act as an enemy of the Government, if my judgment should so dictate. Still to avoid the imputation of error I studiously avoided taking up arms against the United States till after the expiration of the ten days. I was not in arms against the Government at Milford. I did no act and gave no counsel against the Government, {p.369} although I did not doubt [that] I had a right as an enemy [to do] either or both. Technically by a refinement of thought I was in the “camp of the enemy,” but I was not there as aider, abetter or combatant. I had a right to be there or at any other place which offered a security which [neither] my home nor the military post of Sedalia could afford me. I was an enemy, had a right to rejoin the army and was on my way to it. My purpose was to have left the camp at Milford and proceed alone for I thought they were careless and did not use the proper vigilance for their own security. The capture prevented the execution of that purpose. If in the deep perturbation of mind caused by the greatest calamity of my life I misunderstood the action of the Government officers and did not truly appreciate the relation in which that negotiation placed me toward the United States I deeply regret it. But in the face of Heaven I declare that in all I did I acted in strict conformity to whatever I understood of obligation. It is very painful to me to think-[Copy mutilated].

[E. MAGOFFIN.]

–––

JUDGE-ADVOCATE’S OFFICE, April -*, 1862.

In the matter of Ebenezer Magoffin, confined in a cell in the military prison at Alton under sentence of death by order of General Halleck. Execution of death suspended by order of the President, and the record sent up for his consideration.

The facts of record appear to be: He was tried before a species of tribunal instituted by General Halleck at Saint Louis and styled a military commission on two charges-first, for that, “not being a legitimate belligerent” he did, in Pettis County, Mo., “kill and murder a sergeant of the Illinois cavalry;” and, second, for “violation of parole not to resume arms against the United States.”

To the first charge, considering it substantially as a charge of murder, he pleaded to the jurisdiction, and that waiving the question of the lawfulness of his arrest and imprisonment he was in the matter of that charge answerable only in due course of law; that he was a citizen of the United States and of the State of Missouri; that the fact was laid in a district where the laws of both were in unobstructed force and capable of execution and the courts open and free to try and punish; and he claimed the protection of the laws and Constitution of the United States.

The plea was overruled. Then on trial he was acquitted of that charge, but convicted of the second, violation of parole, and sentenced to death. In regard to the parole Lieutenant-Colonel Brown, Seventh Missouri Volunteers, testifies that Magoffin’s wife being near death he gave him on the 10th of December leave to visit her and a protection or safeguard on condition not to commit any act of hostility or give any information; that he accompanied Magoffin to his house and there put it in writing essentially as follows:

A safeguard is granted to Col. E. Magoffin protecting him in person and property until the 20th day of December, 1861. Officers and soldiers of the U. S. Army will obey this order and in no way molest him or his family.

* Day not entered.

{p.370}

That afterward, on the 15th of December, understanding that Magoffin desired an extension he sent to be delivered to him a second safeguard in words as follows, dated back to the 10th “to correct any supposed defects in the first,” viz:

Whereas, Ebenezer Magoffin, formerly a colonel in the Army of the Southern Confederacy, has given his parole of honor that he will not in any manner by word or deed aid, assist or give countenance to the enemies of the United States Government; and whereas, by order of General Halleck said Magoffin is to he permitted to remain at home or vicinity in the quiet unmolested pursuit of his usual peaceful occupations: I therefore order all officers and soldiers of the U. S. Army to give him protection and by this safeguard he is protected in person and property as long as he remains in the quiet pursuit of his ordinary business, in same manner as other loyal citizens of the United States.

The first was written at Magoffin’s house in conformity to previous agreement. Witness did not deliver it to him personally because when he went to his room for that purpose he found him holding in his arms his wife supposed to be dying and therefore he handed it to the daughter of Magoffin, who did not then see, read or have it read to him. Witness has not since seen it; has only a general recollection of its terms; thinks something about loyalty to the United States was in it; it was written amid much distress in the family. When asked whether it was given merely to allow Magoffin to visit his family or with the understanding that he was to become and to remain a loyal citizen witness answers to visit his family for a time and to remain if he chose; that in respect to remaining Magoffin had said when it was proposed in conversation at the interview before they went to the house that his mind was harassed and he wished time (ten or fifteen days) to decide; whereupon witness agreed to give it for a limited time, leaving him at the expiration thereof to place himself in the same position as before-that is, “as an enemy.” He was not a prisoner of war further than by the receiving the safeguard and giving his parole. Witness further states that Magoffin was then so distracted as to be unable to keep up a connected conversation and in so great distress that witness thought him bordering on insanity.

Doctor Hughes, witness of the prosecution, states he informed the officers of the condition of Magoffin’s wife and asked leave and safe conduct for him to see her; arranged the interview between Colonel Brown and Magoffin. Colonel Brown asked Magoffin what it was he wished; he answered the privilege to go to the sick-bed of his wife in safety. Colonel Brown inquired for what length of time; Magoffin answered ten or twenty days by which time her illness would end one way or the other. Colonel Brown replied he should be privileged to do so. Witness suggested to make it perpetual. Magoffin said he was then in no condition of mind to determine upon that and asked the privilege of deciding on that within the time stated. Colonel Brown promptly assented. Then the three went to Magoffin’s house; found his wife in a dying condition. Colonel Brown would not disturb him but wrote the safeguard without Magoffin’s knowledge and left it for him. It was a promise of protection of person and property until the 20th; could not say that accused promised or pledged himself to do anything. He appeared to be not entirely himself from distress and want of rest. Colonel Brown thought his mind seriously threatened.

This is the case for the prosecution as respects the first safeguard and the pledges given for it. It shows I think merely a case of safeguard or safe-conduct to come and stay in safety a certain time not the release of a prisoner to go on parole not to resume arms. The exact conditions imposed with it are not ascertained. The paper is not produced. {p.371} The witnesses cannot testify to the terms; they are not certain as to the substance. But the effect and conclusion from their whole testimony is that Magoffin was pledged (as is reasonable, proper and customary in case of safeguard) to do no act of hostility or give information while profiting of it.

In regard to the second safeguard it was given by Colonel Brown to Hughes for Magoffin. Hughes delivered it on the 15th of December. They read it and discussed the conditions. Hughes left it with him. On the 18th Hughes received it back and the following from Magoffin:

PRAIRIE [LEA], [December] 16, 1861.

Doctor HUGHES.

DEAR SIR: You were at my house last night and left with me a written pass. Previously I had accepted one which does not expire until the 20th day of this month. It was understood that I had until that time to deliberate the proposition made by Colonel Brow* and yourself concerning the parole. I am deeply grateful to you both for the kindness you have shown me; it was generous and disinterested. But reliable information has reached me to-day from two sources that a conspiracy has been made to assassinate me in my home. Reluctantly I am compelled to leave it again. I therefore send you back the pass you left with me. I cannot accept it. I must express again my sincere gratitude to yourself and Colonel Brown for your kindness and regret that circumstances have frustrated your friendly purposes and that I am compelled to leave a young and helpless family to the mercy of my enemies.

Truly, your friend,

E. MAGOFFIN.

The return of this second safeguard within the term of the first and the time expressly allowed him to consider of the acceptance of an extended or perpetual one puts it out of consideration in the question of his violation of parole which is to be decided on the terms and conditions of the first.

The alleged violation is in being with the armed rebels captured at Milford on the 19th of December. It appears that he was not armed and took no part in the fight. He says he was traveling with them for protection. Being with them and holding a commission in the same service, if then not in command or on duty I think he may be considered as with them or in league with them as the charge alleges, and that he is therefore properly made prisoner of war like the rest. But I cannot see in what he has committed any violation of his parole or of the conditions of his safeguard. He had left his house to return to the condition from which he came; within the term he had privilege to do so. The witness, Colonel Brown, who gave it, states:

The accused was regarded as an officer in the army of General Sterling Price, which he claimed and acknowledged himself to be. At the time of the giving of the first safeguard the accused was not viewed in the light of a prisoner of war further than the giving of the safeguard and the receiving the parole would constructively make him so; that he would be at liberty at the time the safeguard expired to leave his home and place himself in the same position as before I met him-that is as an enemy.

If the theory of the prosecution and the principle of the judgment be that having such liberty when the safeguard expired-that is on the 20th of December-he had it not before-that is on the 16th or 17th when he left his home, and the 19th when he was taken at Milford-that is error. The rule of public law is the reverse. He is bound to go before the safeguard expires. Vattel says:

A safe-conduct for a stated term expires at the end of it. The bearer is to retire, before that time or he may be seized and punished if he has given room for suspicion by delay of his own framing. Though in case of safe-conduct, revocable at pleasure, bearer is allowed a proper time for his safe departure.

{p.372}

But supposing for which I see no ground that he violated his parole or the pledge of honor on which the safe-conduct was granted him-what then? What penalty did he incur? He forfeited his protection undoubtedly. He was liable to capture like any unprotected enemy. I doubt if the penalty extends further unless he has acted as a spy. But even considering him not as an enemy on safe-conduct but a prisoner released on parole not to take arms, what then is the penalty by the laws of war for violation of that parole? I find nothing decisive of the question in the writers on public law. Vattel, Wildman, Wheaton, while they assert the binding obligation of such parole and deny the power of the sovereign to dispense from it or forbid its observance pass by in silence the question of penalty. Halleck, the latest-writer on international law and the laws of war, does not meet the point precisely. He says the act of government in forcing a soldier “to violate his parole” is futile as a protection to him, and is semi-barbarism in the government; that Mexican prisoners released on parole were organized into guerrilla bands under robber chiefs furnished with military commissions from government. “Such attempts,” he adds, “to violate the ordinary rules of war not only justify but require prompt and severe punishment.” What punishment? Death or more rigorous imprisonment than that from which they had been relieved and that other prisoners are subject to? And for what cause? Because they were again in arms, or because in guerrilla bands under robber chiefs? “Accordingly,” he proceeds, “General Scott announced his intention to hang every one retaken after thus violating his parole.” He thus so far as he indorses the doctrine may refer to the aggravated circumstances just stated. General Scott, however, does lay the doctrine down without qualification. At least he requests the archbishop of Mexico so to advise and instruct the Mexicans that death is the penalty for violating parole. But I do not find that doctrine in the books. In the debate in the House of Lords on the execution of Colonel Hayne by the British at Charleston the lord chancellor and the ministerial side argued that a prisoner taken in arms in violation of parole was liable to instant execution without other form of trial than that necessary to identify the person. The opposition denied the ministerial doctrine. The Earl of Shelburne said:

The practice in the late war was totally different. A great degree of ignominy and stricter confinement were the consequences of breach of parole. Persons guilty of that offense are shunned by gentlemen. But it had never before entered into the head of a commander to hang them.

Earl of Effingham said:

The lord chancellor’s quotation from Grotius related to spies and not prisoners who had broken their paroles.

But admit that prisoners of war may be put to death for violation of parole-and it seems only just and reasonable that they should be where the breach of faith betrays the adversary into disaster or results in any serious injury to him-it will not be said that the extreme penalty should attend every case. This case if a case at all is not an aggravated but a very mitigated case. He took no part in the action. He was not in arms, but he was with the enemy and belonging to their service; he was prisoner of war like the rest.

Under these circumstances the Government ought I think to discharge this man from the sentence of death; and may also consider whether to order his detention as prisoner of war, or in consideration of {p.373} the error of the sentence and of his confinement as a felon waiting execution of death to order his release on parole.

I believe the analysis I here submit presents a fair view of the force and effect of the evidence and of the true merits of the case; but as I differ so entirely in my conclusions on it from the commission and General Halleck, I must respectfully request the President to read the entire record which in respect of the second charge is not long.

I have considered in this case only the questions it presents of public law. It involves also many questions of municipal law. A public enemy in arms is liable to be proceeded against according to the laws of war; an inhabitant of a country under martial law is liable to the code or system which the conqueror having driven out the laws and tribunals of the country may proclaim and establish. This I understand to be the foundation of martial law-to be recognized as valid in that state of things because arbitrary power is better than anarchy, and any law than no law. But I do not understand that our Government recognizes that state of things, or will base any system of executive orders and proceedings upon such theory or principle.

Under our municipal laws, State or Federal, these proceedings are of no validity. Military commissions are not a tribunal known to our laws, and military commanders have no power to inflict death except by sentence of courts-martial.

Respectfully submitted.

J. F. LEE, Judge-Advocate.

–––

FRANKFORT, Ky., March 29, 1862.

Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.

DEAR SIR: I have carefully examined and considered an abstract of the evidence in the case of Col. Ebenezer Magoffin, of Missouri, who has been found guilty by a military court-martial* of violating his parole. This abstract was prepared by William T. Wood, esq., of Saint Loins, who is a native Kentuckian and with whom I have been acquainted from boyhood. I have arrived at the conclusion that the sentence of the court-martial ought not to be carried into execution.

First. Whatever may have been the influence and opinions of the witnesses of the prosecution respecting a parole of Magoffin it is very certain he did not regard himself as under parole not having accepted the paper left at his house by Colonel Hughes and which Magoffin returned to Hughes the 17th of December, three days before the expiration of the time prescribed in the paper given by Colonel Brown. Conceding that Magoffin was mistaken in the legal view he took of the matter and he was according to the military law under parole, should his life be forfeited for an honest mistake of his duty in the premises?

Second. His departure from home before the 20th of December is satisfactorily accounted for. He was informed he would be assassinated if he remained at home, and all of the circumstances conduced to show he had reasonable grounds to believe the information he had received was true. Under the circumstances he thought his only plan of safety was in the presence of a sufficient number of his friends; and this accounts for his being found and taken prisoner at some battle fought in Missouri the past winter. From the evidence I learn he had no {p.374} command on that occasion and did not in fact participate in the engagement, which resulted in the defeat of the Confederate forces. It as the evidence and all of the circumstances conduce to prove Magoffin was there for personal safety only it explains the cause of his departure from home at the time stated.

With great respect, your friend and obedient servant,

JAMES HARLAN.

I concur in the views and petition set forth above.

J. B. TEMPLE, President Kentucky Military Board.

I concur in the view set forth in the foregoing.

G. T. WOOD, Member of Military Board. JNO. W. FINNELL, Adjutant-General Kentucky Volunteers.

* Magoffin was not tried by a court-martial, but by a military commission.

–––

Trial of John C. Tompkins, accused of bridge-burning, etc.

PALMYRA, MO., December 30, 1861.

At a military commission which convened on Monday, the 30th day of December, 1861, at Palmyra, Mo., pursuant to authority derived from the major-general commanding the Department of the Missouri under the following order, to wit-

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 97.

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, December 27, 1861.

...

II. A military commission is hereby appointed to meet at Palmyra, Mo., on Monday, the 30th instant, or as soon thereafter as practicable, for the trial of such persons as may be brought before it.

Detailed for the commission: Col. John Groesbeck, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers; Lieutenant-Colonel Tinkham, Twenty-sixth Illinois Volunteers, Capt. Henry T. McDowell; Capt. David C. Benjamin; Capt. Henry Binmore, assistant adjutant-general, who will act as judge-advocate and recorder.

The commission will sit without regard to hours.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

All the members of the court [commission] detailed as above being present, John C. Tompkins was arraigned upon the following charges, to wit:

CHARGE 1: Bridge, railroad and car burning.

Specification-That on the night of the 20th of December, 1861, the said John C. Tompkins with other persons unknown did unlawfully within the Military District of North-Missouri burn and destroy one railroad bridge known as the Sturgeon bridge and also one other railroad bridge known as the “Long Branch bridge,” and certain railroad ties, rails, tanks and cars, which bridges, ties, rails, tanks and cars formed a part of the common traveled way known as the North Missouri Railroad. This in violation of martial law prevailing in the said Military District of North Missouri and in the State of Missouri.

CHARGE 2: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-That the said John C. Tompkins did on the evening or night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, tracks, rails and cars, being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-That the said John C. Tompkins did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of

{p.375}

Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 3: Aiding and abetting in the act of bridge-burning and in the destruction of a part or portion of the North Missouri Railroad and the cars and rolling-stock thereof.

Specification.-That the said John C. Tompkins did on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and abet in the act of bridge-burning and in the destruction of bridges and in the destruction of a portion of the North Missouri Railroad and of cars upon the track of said railroad, by chopping with axes, by carrying fence-rails, by exciting language, &c.

CHARGE 4: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specifications.-In this, that John C. Tompkins did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

DAVID McKEE, Major Black Hawk Cavalry.

The prisoner having been asked whether he had any objection to any member of the commission, and having replied, “I do not know the gentlemen; I have none,” the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War was administered to the court [commission] by the acting judge-advocate, and as soon as the said oath had been administered to the several members of the commission the president thereof administered to the acting judge-advocate the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War, the prisoner being present while the oaths were administered.

To the first charge John C. Tompkins, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the second charge John C. Tompkins, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the third charge John C. Tompkins, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the fourth charge John C. Tompkins, the prisoner, pleads guilty. The acting judge-advocate (Captain Binmore) laid before the commission telegrams as follows:

HUDSON, December 21, 1861.

Brigadier-General PRENTISS:

North Missouri road torn up below last night. ...

WM. BISHOP, Colonel, Commanding.

HUDSON, December 31, 1861.

J. H. GAMBLE, Superintendent, Saint Charles:

The North Missouri track is torn up and burned commencing eight miles from this place. Don’t know how far south they have gone. Burnt the ties, bent iron and cut the telegraph poles and destroyed the wire and burnt water-tanks.

J. B. CLARKE, Operator.

HANNIBAL, December 23, 1861.

General PRENTISS:

The North Missouri road is badly injured. ...

“J. T. K. HAYWARD.

ADAM GOSLING, witness introduced, being duly sworn pursuant to the seventy-third Article of War is examined as follows:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. In the town of Sturgeon, Boone County, Mo.

Question. Where were you during the night of Friday, the 20th of December last?

Answer. At my house in Sturgeon.

{p.376}

Question. Were you there during all the night?

Answer. I was until I was taken away.

Question. Who took you away?

Answer. A body of about 300 cavalry.

Question. Armed cavalry?

Answer. The most were armed I think.

Question. Were they soldiers of the U. S. Army?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. How do you know that?

Answer. I am acquainted with most or many of them. I am acquainted with many of them and know them to belong or to have been with Price’s army. I knew them near Sturgeon. They have been there all this fall until the Lexington fight; then they principally all left and went there.

Question. Do you know one Watson, called Captain Watson?

Answer. I never saw him before that night that I know of.

Question. Was he of the party that visited and took you?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Do you recognize this man as being there?

Answer. Yes, sir; I think I do.

Question. What did this man say or do on that occasion?

Answer. That man never spoke to me after I had seen him.

Question. How long did he stay at your house?

Answer. I presume he stopped in an hour, or perhaps half an hour.

Question. During their stay what did they do?

Answer. After they took me from my house as I passed my store we went into my store. I asked them if they would not go inside; they said they would. I opened the door, and they said they would go in and they went in; and they said they wanted their canteens filled and I filled them with liquor. I of course gave it to them.

Question. Did you give it to them because of their force?

Answer. I was disposed to treat them the best I knew how.

Question. For what reason?

Answer. They would treat me the better.

Question. What had they against you?

Answer. I had been a Union man I suppose.

Question. Did they take you from your dwelling-house?

Answer. Yes, sir; they did.

Question. Did they demand you to go to the store?

Answer. No; they told me to go with them and as we passed up I asked them into the store.

Question. State whether they took any other property.

Answer. Not that I know of. We remained at the store from half an hour to an hour and a half.

Question. Charge your memory particularly and let the court know if you saw Tompkins there.

Answer. There is no question of his being there. I know he was in the crowd.

{p.377}

Question. Did you see Sturgeon bridge while it was burning?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Was the prisoner there?

Answer. There is no question of his being there. I know he was one of the crowd but whether he was right close at the fire I could not be positive. I saw him before the fire and afterward.

PRISONER. I can prove I was not there by respectable ladies. I know I was at home asleep that night.

WITNESS. I know that after the bridge was burned we went to Long Branch bridge and he was there. When we returned back when the last bridge was burned we returned to Sturgeon, and we as a body passed over the railroad. Mr. Tompkins did not return but he was arrested on his way back.

Question. You have no doubt upon your mind as to his presence?

Answer. I have not any.

Question. Have you not heretofore at a preliminary examination stated positively that he was there?

Answer. Yes.

Question. And were you not thoroughly certain of the fact that of all you saw there his name suggested itself to your mind first?

Answer. I so recognized him.

Question. Have you any knowledge as to whether this man is an enrolled soldier in Price’s army?

Answer. No, sir; I have not.

Question. Is it your belief that he is?

Answer. I know nothing of that except I have no doubt by what he stated that he has been, but I don’t know. I know that within the last few weeks a good many of them have returned from the army.

CAPTAIN FORBES, of the Twenty-second Missouri Regiment of U. S. Volunteers, was duly sworn pursuant to the seventy-third Article of War.

Question. State what you know of the prisoner being in arms against the United States.

Answer. When we turned off the main road down the lane that we went down before the fight I went down alone. I was to see if that was the lane, because we had a guide with us and he was not certain that was the lane. I went down the lane and discovered that was right, and he told me that was the place. I beckoned for the advance to come along, and just as we came along the pickets of their party turned in sight. They were not certain whether we were friends or foes and when we got within thirty yards of them I hallooed to them to halt and throw down their arms. We fired on them and knocked one of them. The prisoner I believe was shot through the skirt of his coat. He threw his arms down. I went on and told some of the men to stop there. The major was behind me. That is about all I know of that case.

Question. Was this man one of the guard you have spoken of?

Answer. Yes; I had seen that man before then.

Question. State the circumstances.

Answer. The first time that Lieutenant-Colonel Morse went after Sweeney I went to where this man was doing business. I found two guns. He told me they were left for his own protection. I asked him when a man named Swabee had been there. He told me he had not been there for some time.

No further testimony being introduced, the commission finds the prisoner guilty as charged in the first charge and specification thereunder; also guilty as charged in charge 2 and as charged in specifications {p.378} 1 and 2 thereunder; also guilty as charged in third charge and its specification; also guilty as changed in charge 4 and its specification, and does therefore sentence him, John C. Tompkins, to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department shall direct.

JOHN GROESBECK, Colonel Thirty-ninth Ohio, President. HENRY BINMORE, Assistant Adjutant-General and Acting Judge-Advocate.

–––

Trial of William J. Forshey, charged with bridge-burning and violation of parole.

William J. Forshey was arraigned* upon the following charges and specifications, to wit:

CHARGE 1: Bridge, railroad and car burning.

Specification-That on the night of the 20th of December, 1861, the said William J. Forshey with other persons unknown did unlawfully within the Military District of North Missouri burn and destroy one railroad bridge known as the Sturgeon bridge and also one other railroad bridge known as the Long Branch bridge, and certain railroad ties, rails, tanks and cars, which bridges, ties, rails, tanks and cars formed a part of the common traveled way known as the North Missouri Railroad. This in violation of martial law prevailing in the said Military District of North Missouri and in the State of Missouri.

CHARGE 2: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-That the said William J. Forshey did upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, track, rails and cars, being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-That the said William J. Forshey did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track over a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad, and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 3: Aiding and abetting in the act of bridge-burning and in the destruction of a part or portion of the North Missouri Railroad and the cars and rolling-stock thereof.

Specification-That the said William J. Forshey did on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and abet in the act of bridge-burning and in the destruction of bridges and in the destruction of a portion of the North Missouri Railroad, and of cars upon the track of said railroad by chopping with axes, by carrying fence-rails, by exciting with language, &c.

CHARGE 4: Violation of parole.

Specification-That the said William J. Forshey, having been released from the custody of the military authority of the United States upon his parole of honor that lie would not take up arms against the peace and dignity of the United States or of the State of Missouri, did on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, or the morning of Saturday, the 21st of December, 1861, violate that parole by opposing the forces of the United States by the destruction of railroad bridges, ties and tracks, and by the firing of arms with the intent to slay and wound officers and soldiers of the U. S. Army.

CHARGE 5: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that William J. Forshey did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same, and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers, of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

DAVID McKEE, Major Black Hawk Cavalry.

* Before the commission constituted by Special Orders, No. 97, p. 374. No date, but probably on same day that Tompkins was tried.

{p.379}

The prisoner having been asked whether he had any objection to any member of the commission and having replied, “No, sir,” the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War was administered to the court [commission] by the acting judge-advocate, and as soon as the said oath had been administered to the several members of the commission, the president thereof administered the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War to the acting judge-advocate, the prisoner being present while the oaths were administered.

To the first charge and specification William J. Forshey, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the second charge with its specifications William J. Forshey, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the third charge with its specification William J. Forshey, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the fourth charge with its specification William J. Forshey, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the fifth charge with its specification William J. Forshey, the prisoner, pleads guilty.

ADAM GOSLING, a witness introduced, was duly sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War.

Question. You live in Sturgeon?

Answer. Yes, sir; in Boone County.

Question. Have you ever seen the prisoner before?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. When and where did you see him last?

Answer. I saw him several times on the cars as we came here.

Question. Where did you see him before that?

Answer. I saw him at Sturgeon. He was arrested north of Sturgeon.

Question. Is this man a resident of Sturgeon?

Answer. He lives down south a little I believe.

Question. State to the court under what circumstances you saw him at Sturgeon at that time?

Answer. He was in my store with a lot of men on the night of the fire.

Question. What night was that?

Answer. Friday a week ago-the 20th of December.

Question. Did he come to your house to arrest you?

Answer. He was with the rest after I opened the store; he came in with the rest.

Question. Did he leave your store before or after the rest?

Answer. About the same time, I think; perhaps before.

Question. Did you see him at the bridge-burning?

Answer. He was at the bridge-burning on the night of the 20th.

Question. What are the names of the bridges?

Answer. One is the Sturgeon bridge, and I think the other is called the Long Branch bridge.

Question. He was then one of them who was at the bridge-burning?

Answer. Yes, sir; I heard him come up to Captain Watson and speak to him. I understood him to say the guard was ready. I think he had left a little before we left and then he came back.

{p.380}

Question. Was he at the bridge-burning?

Answer. He was in the crowd when they left my store. I think this man was one of them.

Question. Have you known him before?

Answer. I merely identify the prisoner as one I saw there when the bridge was burned.

Question. Have you any knowledge of his having been arrested by the military authorities of the United States before this?

Answer. Not to my knowledge.

Question. Was he mounted? Was he on horseback when you saw him?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Was he under arms that night?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Did you recognize him as belonging to any army?

Answer. Yes.

Question. What army? What service was he in; do you know?

Answer. The rebel service at that time.

Question. When the crowd left your store did they march in line until they reached the bridge?

Answer. Yes, sir; I believe so. A part of them remained on horseback while the bridge was burning.

Captain FORBES, of the Twenty-second Missouri Regiment, was duly sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War:

Question. Did you arrest the prisoner?

Answer. He was arrested by some of my men-the advance.

Question. Had you ever seen him before?

Answer. O, yes; I once met him. I was in a party to arrest Swabee and Hatton and he denied they were at Swabee’s house, and Captain Hawk and several men went down there and arrested them, and I accused this young man of telling a falsehood and I took his name, and when I saw him the other morning I recognized him. I could not call his name. I saw him again in their camp and they called his name.

No further testimony being introduced the commission finds the prisoner guilty as charged in the first charge and the specifications under it; also guilty as charged in charge 2 and as charged in specifications 1 and 2 thereunder; also guilty as charged in charge 3 and specification under it; also that charge 4 is not proven against the prisoner; also guilty as charged in charge 5 and specification under it, and does therefore sentence him, William J. Forshey, to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department shall direct.

JOHN GROESBECK, Colonel Thirty-ninth Ohio, President. HENRY BINMORE, Assistant Adjutant-General, and Acting Judge-Advocate.

{p.381}

–––

Trial of John Patton for bridge-burning and treason.

John Patton was arraigned* upon the following charges, to wit:

CHARGE 1: Bridge, railroad and car burning.

Specification.-That on the night of the 20th of December, 1861, the said John Patton with other persons unknown did unlawfully within the Military District of North Missouri burn and destroy one railroad bridge known as the Sturgeon Bridge and also one other railroad, bridge known as the Long Branch bridge, and certain railroad ties, rails, tanks and cars, which bridges, ties, rails, tanks and cars formed a part of the common traveled way known as the North Missouri Railroad. This in violation of martial law prevailing in the said Military District of North Missouri and in the State of Missouri.

CHARGE 2: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-That the said John Patton did on the evening or night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, track, rails and cars, being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-That the said John Patton did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track, or a portion thereof, of the North Missouri Railroad, and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 3: Aiding and abetting in the act of bridge-burning and in the destruction of a part or portion of the North Missouri Railroad and the cars and rolling-stock thereof.

Specification-That the said John Patton did on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and abet in the act of bridge-burning and in the destruction of a portion of the North Missouri Railroad and of cars upon the track of said railroad by chopping with axes, by carrying fence-rails, by exciting language, &c.

CHARGE 4: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that John Patton did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

DAVID McKEE, Major Black Hawk Cavalry.

The prisoner having been asked whether he had any objection to any member of the commission and having replied, “I have no objection,” the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War was administered to the court [commission] by the acting judge-advocate, and as soon as the said oath had been administered to the several members of the commission the president thereof administered to the acting judge-advocate the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War, the prisoner being present while the oaths were administered.

To the first charge John Patton, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the second charge John Patton, the prisoner, pleads guilty.

To the third charge John Patton, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the fourth charge John Patton, the prisoner, pleads guilty.

ADAM GOSLING, witness introduced, being duly sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War is examined as follows:

Question. State to the court if you ever knew the prisoner and if you met him on the night of the 20th of December last.

Answer. Yes. I don’t know that I was acquainted with the prisoner before the night of the 20th when he came in my store with a lot of men and was talking to me a great deal that night. I inquired of him as to Mr. Patton that he was from Price’s army, and if he had seen some acquaintances there. He started with us when we started to the bridge.

{p.382}

Question. Did he go to the Long Branch bridge?

Answer. I don’t know.

Question. After starting with you to go to the bridge-burning where did you lay eyes on him the next time?

Answer. I did not see him any more until I saw him next morning.

Question. You cannot swear that he was with you all the time?

Answer. He was with us all the time at the Sturgeon bridge. As to seeing him all the time particularly I could not swear.

Question. After leaving the town of Sturgeon you don’t remember to have seen him until next morning?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. He started with the party?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Did the men proceed in a continual line?

Answer. Yes, sir; in order.

Question. Did you see anybody leave the line?

Answer. Not unless they staid behind.

Question. Where were you in line?

Answer. I presume there were about 100 men before me.

For the PRISONER:

Question. Do you recollect seeing me at your store?

Answer. Yes, sir. Don’t you recollect asking me about old man Forman or some one?

To the PRISONER:

Question. What county are you a citizen of?

Answer. Boone County.

Maj. DAVID MCKEE, witness introduced, being sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War examined.

Question. Were you present at the skirmish at or near Crab Apple Grove on Saturday, December 21?

Answer. I was in command and present.

Question. Under what circumstances was the prisoner arrested?

Answer. To the best of my impression the first that I saw of him was in the cornfield after the battle. Some men in advance of us captured him, and I recognized this man more particularly as a man wearing such a cap as that (pointing to the cap worn by prisoner). I think I remarked since the battle that he looked very much like the man that passed through the corn-field, and he said he was the man.

Question. Was he leaving the battle-field?

Answer. Yes, sir; he was about the last man that left too.

Question. Had you ever seen him before?

Answer. Not to recognize him; not to know him.

Question. When you saw him in the corn-field was he armed?

Answer. Yes; I think he was. He came stepping along through the corn-field pretty fast but I think he had arms.

Question. Who arrested Patton?

Answer. It was Major Linder. I have a man here who was in company with him after the fight.

{p.383}

No farther testimony being demanded by the commission, the commission finds the prisoner guilty as charged in the first charge and specification thereunder; also guilty as charged in charge 2 and as charged in specifications 1 and 2 thereof; also guilty as charged in the third charge and its specification; also guilty as charged in the fourth charge and its specification, and does therefore sentence him, John Patton, to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department shall direct.

JOHN GROESBECK, Colonel Thirty-ninth Ohio, President. HENRY BINMORE, Assistant Adjutant-General and Acting Judge-Advocate.

* Before the commission constituted by Special Orders, No. 97, p. 374. No date, hut probably same day on which Tompkins and Forshey were tried.

–––

Trial of Richard B. Crowder, accused of bridge-burning and treason.

PALMYRA, MO., Wednesday, January 1, 1862.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment at 10 a.m.

Present: Col. John Groesbeck, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers, president; Lieut. Col. Charles J. Tinkham, Twenty-sixth Illinois Volunteers; Capt. Henry T. McDowell, Company A, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers; Capt. David C. Benjamin, Company I, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers; Capt. Henry Binmore, assistant adjutant-general, acting judge-advocate and recorder.

Richard B. Crowder was arraigned upon the following charges, to wit:

CHARGE 1: Bridge, railroad and car burning.

Specification.-In this, that on the night of the 20th of December, 1861, the said Richard B. Crowder with other persons unknown did unlawfully within the Military District of North Missouri burn and destroy one railroad bridge known as the Sturgeon bridge and also one other railroad bridge known as the Long Branch bridge, and certain railroad ties, rails, tanks and cars, which bridges, ties, rails, tanks and cars formed part of the common traveled way known as the North Missouri Railroad. This in violation of martial law prevailing in the said Military District of North Missouri and in the State of Missouri.

CHARGE 2: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-In this, that the said Richard B. Crowder did on the evening or night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, track, rails and cars, being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-In this, that the said Richard B. Crowder did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 3: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification.-In this, that-Richard B. Crowder did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer of the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

DAVID McKEE, Major Black Hawk Cavalry.

The prisoner having been asked whether he had any objection to any member of the commission and having replied,” None that I know of; they are gentlemen that I never saw,” the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War was administered to the court by the acting judge-advocate; and as soon as the said oath had been administered {p.384} to the several members of the commission the president thereof administered to the acting judge-advocate the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War, the prisoner being present while the oaths were administered.

To the first charge Richard B. Crowder, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the second charge Richard B. Crowder, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the third charge Richard B. Crowder, the prisoner, pleads guilty.

JACK BLAIN, witness introduced, being duly sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War is examined as follows:

Question. Did you arrest the prisoner?

Answer. I was of the party. We arrested him on Friday night between Allen and Renick, betwixt 10 and 11 o’clock. We arrested him with another young man by name of Cunningham, I think.

Question. Tell what was going on.

Answer. We came up on the road-a party of Colonel Morse’s command. We came with a part of his command and stopped, and as we stopped there a party fired and afterward ran. After a short time two gentlemen rode up there. We fired on them and retreated. A short time after that three persons rode up. We ordered them to halt. The third run his horse; we fired on him. We took a gun away from Cunningham. I did not take a gun from this man, but there was a gun-taken from him also a revolver. After we had arrested this man we staid there a short time, and Colonel Morse had been to Renick.

Question. What was said or done by the prisoner?

Answer. We inquired of the prisoners after we arrested them if they belonged to any company. They said they had been with this company, and they said that Mr. Perkins-I think he said Major Perkins-had command of it and that they had been sent away on business. They did not state on what business.

Question. How near to the railroad were they?

Answer. About ten or fifteen feet.

Question. Did either of them in the presence of the other subsequently state the business?

Answer. Cunningham afterward told me, “We had been sent out on picket guard.”

Question. You are sure they were his words are you?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. At the time you arrested this man was the railroad burning?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Were they in view of it?

Answer. Yes, sir; about ten or fifteen feet off.

Question. Could they feel the heat of it; were they near enough?

Answer. I should say so. There was a cattle guard on fire, and I should think it was not over ten feet from them.

Question. How was the fire set?

Answer. They threw up the track and piled wood on top of it.

Question. From his coming up at that time you inferred he was a number of the party?

Answer. Yes, sir.

{p.385}

Question. I mean the party that was engaged in destroying the bridge?

Answer. Yes, sir.

By the PRISONER:

Question. I would like him to be right certain as to whether I had a gun.

Answer. I think so.

Question. Do you think I intended to do anything toward the road?

Answer. I thought so and-think so yet; perhaps not at that time. You rode up but you had no time to do anything. At least I thought you came up to spy on account of the cars running back, and for that reason I suppose you came back as a spy to see what was going on; and if I recollect aright you did not deny of being with them at that time.

M. B. DANIELS, a witness introduced, having been duly sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War is examined as follows:

Question. Will you state where you saw this gentleman and under what circumstances. Give the court an account of his arrest if you were present at it.

Answer. I saw him about three miles from Renick on the North Missouri Railroad at the firing of the railroad there. He and two other men came up on horses with guns. They were halted and two of them arrested-this man and another one.

Question. Did you take any weapon from this man?

Answer. He had a rifle or shotgun. I believe this is the man that had a shotgun.

Question. Did he have any other weapon?

Answer. I did not see it but some of the boys said he had a revolver.

Question. How many guns did you take from the party?

Answer. Two.

Question. Did you take the gun of the man that ran?

Answer. Not until next morning. He was then followed up.

Question. Then you took three guns from the three men?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. How far was prisoner from the fire?

Answer. He was within six feet of the track where the cattle guard was afire.

For the PRISONER:

Question. Were not we entirely off the apron of the crossing of the road when we were arrested?

Answer. You was right on the apron-on the edge.

Question. Did you not get the gun from the gentleman on the yellow nag?

Answer. Both were on yellow nags.

Question. You think you did not get a gun from the gentleman that ran off?

Answer. It was got next morning with a bullet hole in the breech and a powderhorn with it.

Question. How do you know it was his?

{p.386}

Answer. The man was wounded and found dead the next day. Before he died he said the powderhorn was shot off him. And this agreed with his statement.

Question. You are right positive a gun was taken from both those men that were taken prisoners?

Answer. They were.

The commission finds the prisoner guilty as charged in charge 1 with its specification; also guilty as charged in charge 2 with its specifications; also guilty as charged in charge 3 with its specification, and does therefore sentence him, Richard B. Crowder, to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department shall select.

JOHN GROESBECK, Colonel Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers, President. HENRY BINMORE, Assistant Adjutant-General and Acting Judge-Advocate.

–––

Trial of George M. Pulliam, accused of bridge-burning and treason.

PALMYRA, MO., January 1, 1862.

George M. Pulliam was arraigned* upon the following charges, to wit:

CHARGE 1: Bridge, railroad and car burning.

Specification .-That on the night of the 20th of December, 1861, the said George M. Pulliam with other persons unknown did unlawfully within the Military District of North Missouri burn and destroy one railroad bridge known as the Sturgeon bridge and also one other railroad bridge known as the Long Branch bridge, and certain railroad ties, rails, tanks and cars, which bridges, ties, rails, tanks and cars formed a part of the common traveled way known as the North Missouri Railroad. This in violation of martial law prevailing in the said Military District of North Missouri and in the State of Missouri.

CHARGE 2: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-In this, that the said George M. Pulliam did upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, track, rails and cars, being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-In this, that the said George M. Pulliam did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad, and sundry cars upon the said track.

CHARGE 3: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification.-In this, that George M. Pulliam did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

DAVID McKEE, Major Black Hawk Cavalry.

The prisoner having been asked whether he had any objection to any member of the commission and having replied, “I don’t know either of the gentlemen, sir, and I don’t know that I ought to object; I guess they are gentlemen,” the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War was administered to the court by the acting judge-advocate, and as soon as the said oath had been administered to the several members of {p.387} the court [commission] the president thereof administered to the acting judge-advocate the oath prescribed by the Sixty-ninth Article of War, the prisoner being present while the oaths were administered.

To the first charge George M. Pulliam, the prisoner, pleads not guilty. To the second charge George M. Pulliam, the prisoner, pleads not guilty.

To the third charge George M. Pulliam, the prisoner, pleads guilty.

LEMUEL L. SIMPSON, witness introduced, being duly sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War is examined as follows:

Question. Did you make the arrest of the prisoner?

Answer. I was along when it was done.

Question. State all the particulars.

Answer. I don’t know exactly where it was done but when we met him he had a gun that was loaded. He looked at us a bit and he said would we treat him as a prisoner of war? Major Linder said he would. He said he was in the fight and when he was caught he was trying to shoot a lieutenant. He was behind a fence. Some person shot at him and hit him in the hat and grazed his head.

Question. How far was it from the battle you arrested him?

Answer. I don’t know; it was not a great ways though.

Question. How far from the railroad?

Answer. I don’t know that.

Question. What time was this arrest made-on Saturday?

Answer. I think it was; yes, sir-Saturday.

Question. Did you hear him make any expression as to the burning of the railroad property?

Answer. No, sir; I did not.

By the PRISONER:

Question. I would like to ask if he did not hear me say to the major if he did not treat me as a prisoner of war I would not surrender?

Answer. I did not hear you say so.

Question. You just stated that I asked him if he would not treat me as a prisoner of war.

Answer. That you would run you said.

ADAM GOSLING, witness introduced, having been duly sworn pursuant to the Seventy-third Article of War is examined as follows:

Question. Do you recognize this man as one you saw at Sturgeon?

Answer. I can’t say I saw him at the station of Sturgeon; I saw him in camp.

Question. Did you have any conversation with him?

Answer. No; I had this morning.

Question. When were you in camp?

Answer. After the bridge-burning.

Question. Do you remember seeing this man at the burning of the bridge?

Answer. No, sir; I do not.

To PRISONER:

Question. Where do you live?

Answer. In Oregon, Holt County.

{p.388}

Question. When did you join this band?

Answer. I joined it the day before.

Question. At Perche bridge?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. And you went with them fourteen miles to Sturgeon?

Answer. It was in the night. I don’t know the distance.

Question. Where were you at the bridge-burning?

Answer. I was with the rear guard.

Question. How far from the bridge?

Answer. I could see the light; I don’t know how far.

Question. How far were you from the bridge-burning at Long Branch?

Answer. Something like a mile.

Question. You saw it burning?

Answer. I saw the light of the fire.

Question. Were you on guard that night?

Answer. I was in the rear-guard company. We were behind the company.

Question. The soldiers or men were formed in a continuous line at the bridge-burning?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. How long have you been in Price’s army?

Answer. I joined Perkins in Randolph County, and was sent home with wounded men. I went home and was unable to get back. Until the time of the burning I thought we were going back.

Question. What fights were you in?

Answer. Fort Scott fight is the only one. I was left in Bates County and stayed there four or five weeks. The man I was left with had his leg broken. I still belong to Price’s army.

Question. You had knowledge that they were going to burn those bridges?

Answer. I had not when we met the officers who swore us all that we were to meet to rendezvous. The idea we got was that we were to start to Price. They had been talking of it for sometime; that was the talk. Privates know nothing at all about what was going on.

Question. After burning that Sturgeon bridge did you not know of the burning of Long Branch bridge?

Answer. No, sir; I did not know there was a bridge there.

Question. What did you say of the bridge-burning?

Answer. I don’t know I said anything about it.

Question. Did you not condemn it?

Answer. I think as well as I can recollect all of us were talking as soldiers generally are and I merely remarked that it was something I did not approve of. I had nothing to say about it much. I had been raised to never do anything that was dishonest.

Question. Why did you not leave if you thought it wrong?

Answer. I went on to stop in camp.

Question. Did you not voluntarily go to the burning of Long Branch bridge?

Answer. We were in company.

{p.389}

The commission finds the prisoner guilty as charged in charge 1 and the specification under it; also guilty as charged in charge 2 and the specifications under it, also guilty as charged in charge 3 and the specification under it, and does therefore sentence him, George M. Pulliam, to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department may select.**

JOHN GROESBECK, Colonel Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers, President. HENRY BINMORE, Assistant Adjutant-General, Acting Judge-Advocate.

* Before the commission constituted by Special Orders, No. 97, p. 374.

** For Halleck’s approval of the sentences of Tompkins, Forshey, Patton, Crowder and Pulliam see General Orders, No. 20, January 14, 1862, p. 402.

–––

Trial of Thomas S. Foster, accused of violation of the laws of war.

PALMYRA, MO., January 22, 1862-10 a.m.

The court met pursuant to adjournment.

Present: Col. John Groesbeck, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers, president; Lieut. Col. Charles J. Tinkham, Twenty-sixth Illinois Volunteers; Capt. Henry T. McDowell, Company A, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers; Capt. David C. Benjamin, Company I, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers; Capt. Henry Binmore, assistant adjutant-general, acting judge-advocate and recorder.

Thomas S. Foster, accused, being also present.

The acting judge-advocate having read the order convening the court asked the accused, Thomas S. Foster, if he had any objection to any member named therein, to which he replied, “I have not. I know none of them. All I ask is a fair trial.”

The court was duly sworn by the judge-advocate and the judge-advocate was duly sworn by the presiding officer of the court in the presence of the accused. The following charges were then read aloud by the judge-advocate:

CHARGE: Violation of the laws of war.

Specification 1.-In this, that the said Thomas S. Foster did on or about the 10th day of July, 1861, set fire to and destroy and burn the bridge known as the Salt River bridge, said bridge forming a part of the common traveled way known as the Hannibal and Saint Jose ph Railroad. This within the Military District of North Missouri.

Specification 2.-In this, that the said Thomas S. Foster did on or about the 10th day of July, 1861, by his presence, advice, counsel and consent aid and abet one or more persons unknown who on or about the date mentioned did set fire to, burn and destroy a railroad bridge known as the Salt River bridge, said bridge forming a part of the common traveled way known as the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad. This within the Military District of North Missouri.

Specification 3.-In this, that the said Thomas S. Foster did on or about the 10th day of July, 1861, meet with other persons unknown and did conspire with such persons unknown to destroy the railroad bridge known as the Salt River bridge, said bridge forming a part of the common traveled road known as the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad. This within the Military District of North Missouri.

Specification 4.-In this, that the said Thomas S. Foster did on or about the 10th day of July, 1861, set fire to and destroy one or more railroad cars then stationed at or near Hunnewell Station on the line of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad, said railroad cars forming and being a part of the rolling-stock of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad Company. This within the Military District of North Missouri.

{p.390}

Specification 5.-In this, that the said Thomas S. Foster did on or about the 10th day of July, 1861, by his presence, counsel and advice aid two or more persons unknown in the destruction of two or more railroad cars then stationed at or near Hunnewell Station on the line of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad, said railroad cars forming and being a part of the rolling-stock of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad Company. This within the Military District of North Missouri.

JUDGE-ADVOCATE. Thomas S. Foster, you have heard the charge preferred against you; how say you, guilty or not guilty?

To which the accused, Thomas S. Foster, pleaded as follows: “Not guilty.”

CELIA ARDINA RHINO, a citizen, witness on the part of the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. At Hannibal in this State.

Question. Do you know Mr. Foster?

Answer. Certainly.

Question. State to the court what you know of the prisoner in relation to the burning of Salt River bridge.

Answer. I saw the bridge burned. I saw them burning it and I saw the train on fire. When they came nearly opposite where we lived I saw the body of men, and perhaps they might have come to the house. I did not see Foster there at all-it was too far off for me to tell one from another.

Question. You can’t swear under oath that you saw him there?

Answer. I cannot.

Question. Did he come to your residence on that evening?

Answer. If he did I did not know him. There was a gentleman came to the house for an ax.

Question. You do not recognize him as the person who came for the ax?

Answer. Not at all for I knew Doctor Foster well.

Question. Have you a daughter?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Was she at your house?

Answer. Yes, sir; she was at home.

Question. Who else was at your house?

Answer. My daughter and my son-in-law.

Question. What is the name of your daughter who was at home?

Answer. Smith is the daughter I was living with at the time.

Question. Where is she now?

Answer. She lives in Hannibal.

By the COURT:

Question. Did you know any of the parties at all that were engaged in burning the bridge?

Answer. I did not. I was not close enough to tell whether I knew them or not.

Question. How far is your house from the bridge?

Answer. About a quarter of a mile. I could see them plain but could not recognize them.

{p.391}

Question. Did you recognize any man?

Answer. No. I saw them going and coming; I only heard who it was.

Question. Doctor Foster is not the person who borrowed the ax from you?

Answer. He is not.

Question. There was an ax borrowed of you?

Answer. There was.

Question. Did the party state what he borrowed it for?

Answer. No; but my daughter went out and got it.

Question. Did you see the ax used?

Answer. They went to the bridge and I supposed they used it to destroy it.

Question. Did you see that ax used for the splitting of rails?

Answer. I did not.

Question. Have you ever told any one that you saw Doctor Foster splitting rails with that ax?

Answer. No; I think not.

Question. Do you know Mr. Cohen-A. B. Cohen?

Answer. I am not acquainted with him personally; I have heard of him.

Question. Are you knowing to the fact of Doctor Foster being at that time in command of a company of men?

Answer. I do not know it.

Question. Do you know if he was in the so-called Confederate service?

Answer. I don’t know, only what I heard. The last time I saw the doctor to my recollection he was attending my family in my son’s house-to my granddaughter; that is the same thing.

Question. When was that?

Answer. That I don’t know. It has been some time ago.

Cross-examined by the ACCUSED:

Question. Was that some time last spring?

Answer. I think it was this month a year ago.

ANN EVANS, citizen, a witness on the part of the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. I reside at present in Palmyra, Mo.

Question. Are you acquainted with Thomas S. Foster?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. You recognize the person here by that name?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. When did you see him last?

Answer. The last time I saw him was at Shrinkietown.

Question. Under what circumstances?

Answer. I was arrested. I was his prisoner.

{p.392}

Question. State who arrested you and under what circumstances.

Answer. I do not know who arrested me. I did not see Doctor Foster until I got there.

Question. Where is Shrinkietown?

Answer. It is south of Monroe Station I think.

Question. When were you arrested?

Answer. I think it was in July; the day they call the battle of Monroe. I heard Mr. Evans was taken prisoner and I went down.

Question. Were you present at the burning of Salt River bridge?

Answer. No, sir; I live two miles from there. I live at Hunnewell and was at home.

Question. Were you present at Hunnewell when certain cars were burned?

Answer. I was at Hunnewell in sight of it.

Question. How far from the burning at Hunnewell were you?

Answer. I was in sight. I was at home when they came there.

Question. Do you recognize Foster as having been in that crowd?

Answer. He was there.

Question. Do you recognize Foster as being where the cars were burned at Hunnewell Station?

Answer. It was right opposite my house and he was there.

Question. Where was he standing?

Answer. I could not say; he was all about. He did not have a gun; he had something tied up over his shoulder.

Question. Was he standing looking on at the burning of the cars?

Answer. I saw him several times.

Question. While the cars were burning?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. How far were you and he from the cars?

Answer. It is not a great way. I was much frightened. I was afraid they were going to burn my house and Moss told me I need not be afraid.

Question. How far were you from where the cars were burned?

Answer. On the same street; I should think not as far as from here to the hotel.

Question. And you recognize Doctor Foster as being there?

Answer. He was down by the railroad.

Question. How far from your house were the cars burned?

Answer. It was close by.

Question. As far as to the corner?

Answer. I don’t think it was as far as that.

Question. Did you see Foster on the platform or about on the track?

Answer. Yes, sir; I saw him once on the platform. One man came there first before they all came-a man-by the name of Ragsdell; he came in much of a hurry. Several men went to him when he got off his horse and wanted to know what he came for and he said they were coming to burn the bridge.

Question. Was Salt River bridge burned at the same time?

Answer. That evening.

{p.393}

Question. When Ragsdell came the cars were not burning?

Answer. No, sir. He came to see if there was anybody to tell on him I suppose.

Question. The cars were first burned?

Answer. No, sir; they lighted at Mr. Worthington’s and I think they took something to drink. I heard them say “forward march,” “shoulder arms,” and they all marched to the bridge. In a short time I saw the bridge burning and the two tanks, and then they came to the track and I saw them turn the switch, but I did not know any person but Doctor Foster.

Question. What amount of time elapsed between the burning of the Salt River bridge and the burning of the cars at Hunnewell?

Answer. I should think it was not over an hour. They staid there till after dark. I saw them after dark. They went to Mr. Leary’s and got supper.

Question. Did you see them coming?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you see Doctor Foster?

Answer. They were all in the crowd; I saw him there.

Question. Did you see Doctor Foster during the time the crowd was absent?

Answer. No, I did not.

Question. I mean while the body of men were absent at Salt River bridge?

Answer. I did not.

Question. Did you see him before they went there?

Answer. I saw him when they came.

Question. Did you see him after they came back?

Answer. I saw him; yes. I think he had on a light coat-a linen coat-and something tied upon his shoulder. They all had guns but him; he had something else.

By the PRISONER:

Question. Do you recollect anything of my trying to protect that property?

Answer. No, sir. I heard Mr. Moss say not to burn the depot. They allowed some of the men’s property to be taken from the depot-some flour and barrels of things-but anything that belonged to the railroad company they said could not be taken away. 1 asked why they did not burn the depot and Moss said he was the one that persuaded them not to do so.

ARCHIBALD S. ROBARDS, citizen, a witness on the part of the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. In Hannibal, Mo.

Question. Do you know anything about the burning of Salt River bridge?

WITNESS. The first burning do you allude to?

JUDGE-ADVOCATE. Yes, sir; the first burning.

WITNESS. I was at home. I have a farm at Salt River bridge. I was on the farm the night it was burned the last time.

Question. How far is your house from the bridge?

Answer. I suppose three-quarters of a mile; just about.

{p.394}

Question. When was the last burning?

Answer. It was the day that the Shelbina fight was. I don’t recollect the day of the month or what month, but it was the night of or the night after.

Question. Do you know anything about furnishing combustible material to set fire to the bridge?

Answer. I know nothing of it. I was charged with having furnished some tar and turpentine, or that is what I was told afterward.

Question. Do you know any person that was present at the burning?

Answer. It was done after night. I know the officer who said he burned it next morning. It was dark. Some of the boys I knew maybe, but it was so dark that I don’t recollect that I knew any single individual that night.

Question. Did you go down to the bridge?

Answer. I went to the bridge when the captain told me next morning it was burned. I went to see if it was or not. I went down thinking we could put it out and save a good deal of it.

Question. What is the name of this captain that told you of it?

Answer. Captain Grimshaw.

Question. He said he burned the bridge?

Answer. He said he was ordered by Mr. Greene to burn it.

Question. Did you see Foster that night?

Answer. No, sir; I did not.

Question. Did you see him next morning?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. How far from Hunnewell do you live?

Answer. Exactly three miles-that is I have a farm there and am frequently at it.

Question. In which direction?

Answer. Across the river.

Question. When did you see Foster before the burning?

Answer. I saw him that day. He said he was acting as surgeon to a party of Green’s regiment. I don’t know what party it was.

Question. Was Greene’s force in proximity at that time?

Answer. He was with them at the fight. The company that burned the bridge was part of Greene’s company.

Question. Was Doctor Foster with Greene?

Answer. I saw the doctor once there. It was two or three miles from Shelbina.

Question. How far from the bridge?

Answer. It was seven miles.

Question. You speak of his being present at a fight; what fight?

Answer. Shelbina.

Question. Do you know anything of the burning of the cars at Hunnewell?

Answer. Nothing at all. I was at Hannibal and I never knew of it until they sent to me at the depot.

Question. What time was the last burning at Salt River bridge?

Answer. It was perhaps in September.

{p.395}

Question. What time was the first burning of the bridge?

Answer. It was in oat harvest.

Question. Was it Greene’s force was present at the first burning?

Answer. I was not there.

Question. Do you know whether Doctor Foster was with Greene at that time as a surgeon?

Answer. I don’t know. I had not seen the doctor since he left home until about that time.

Question. Have you ever taken the oath of allegiance to the United States?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Have you since the pendency of this rebellion?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Have you not expressed an unwillingness to do so?

Answer. I have told them whenever it was necessary I would take it and when not I would not be willing to do it.

Question. That is rather indefinite. Will you state what you consider to be such a necessity?

Answer. I should be bound to if ordered by the United States Government.

Question. As a citizen you would be unwilling to take such an oath?

Answer. I don’t see the necessity of taking it. I would not take it willingly.

Question. Willingly then you would not swear allegiance to the United States?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. You would take the oath if compelled. Would you consider such an oath binding upon your conscience?

Answer. I should not. I should look upon it as if you forced me to sign a bond or if you forced me to sign a note in favor of Doctor Foster.

By the COURT:

Question. You do not consider yourself a very loyal citizen?

Answer. I don’t know. I consider myself a strong Union man-not in one sense; but I am strong for the Government in one sense-as strong as any gentleman who has a seat at that table. I would like to see the Government restored.

PRESTON T. WORTHINGTON, citizen, a witness on the part of the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. Near Hannibal, Mo.

Question. Are you acquainted with Doctor Foster?

Answer. Not intimately; I have seen him. I know him when I see him.

Question. Did you see him upon the occasion of the burning of the cars at Hunnewell or near there?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. State the circumstances.

Answer. The circumstances are these that the men came in and the cars were burned.

{p.396}

Question. Do you recognize him as being there?

Answer. Yes, I think I do.

Question. State where you saw him.

Answer. I did not see him at that time. I was shut up in my house. I would not see the proceedings that were going on.

Question. You saw the cars burning?

Answer. I saw the smoke coming out of them.

Question. Where were you and Doctor Foster when this band came up to Hunnewell?

Answer. I was at the depot on the platform when he came up.

Question. Then you saw him ride up?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you hear him say anything?

Answer. Nothing in particular. There was some conversation about burning the depot, and some of the citizens were parleying with the crowd not to do it and Foster said if there was any private property there to take it out; that he expected to burn it down; that the order was to burn it down. He did not state that he had the order himself or whether somebody else had it. The way I happened to hear the conversation was I had something in the depot myself.

Question. Did Doctor Foster call at your residence that evening?

Answer. He was not at my residence that evening.

Question. Did you see the doctor at any time that evening shoving the cars off?

Answer. Not at that time. I saw him there perhaps fifteen minutes before.

Question. Did you remove your property from the depot?

Answer. Yes, sip.

Question. Was Doctor Foster near when you were doing it?

Answer. Yes; he was standing on the platform.

Question. Where did the party dismount?

Answer. At various places about town.

Question. Any before your house?

Answer. Some, perhaps all; I don’t know how many were there.

Question. Did you see anybody set fire to the cars?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Do I correctly understand you that you staid within your house to prevent yourself from seeing it?

Answer. Yes, sir. A friend of mine so advised me.

Question. But what you did see you have stated?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. And you heard and saw what you have already stated?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. You are positive as to the words used by Doctor Foster?

Answer. Yes, sir-that he expected to burn or the order was out to burn the depot.

{p.397}

By the PRISONER:

Question. Did you hear anything of my trying to save that depot or the property there?

Answer. You advised some men to save their property as you expected to burn the depot.

Question. Did I not try to save the depot?

Answer. You did not. You spoke of the property of citizens.

Question. What did I have-a gun, or what?

Answer. A box, I think.

D. RUSSELL MOSS, citizen, a witness on the part of the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. State to the court briefly and plainly what you know of the burning of Salt River bridge.

Answer. I believe I know nothing of it. I was at Hunnewell two miles east of Salt River bridge when it was burned.

Question. Were you present at the burning of the cars at Hunnewell?

Answer. I was, sir.

Question. State in the same way the circumstances of that burning.

Answer. I was at Hunnewell when these gentlemen came from the bridge. I reckon there was two companies.

Question. Do you recognize Foster as one of the company or of either company?

Answer. Yes; he was at Hunnewell.

Question. Did you see him on or about the platform close to the cars which were burning?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you see anybody set fire to the cars?

Answer. I did not. There was a street between the cars and the town and a young man rode out on to the street and halloed out if any man had property in the depot to take it out. I had some salt in there. I ran across the street and rolled the salt out, and after I got the salt out I seen Foster standing on the platform and I went to him and said, “For God’s sake, don’t have them burn the depot; it will not do anybody any good and it will do everybody harm.” He remarked to me, “If I can keep these men from burning the depot I will do it,” and he went and talked to this young man and the depot was not burned. I remarked, “Let us move this car some ways from here.” A good many refused to let the car be moved but I got down and took hold and some more took hold and we moved the last car and the depot was not burned.

Question. The cars were burned?

Answer. Yes; I think about four or five.

Question. This was after the burning of the bridge?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did Doctor Foster visit your house before the burning of the bridge?

Answer. No, sir; but I saw him before.

Question. Did he say he or they were going to burn the bridge?

Answer. I think not.

{p.398}

Question. Was not something mentioned in regard to the burning of Salt River bridge?

Answer. It was named but whether Doctor Foster named it or somebody else I don’t know.

Question. He was present, however, when it was named?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Within hearing distance?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Did you not testify before a grand jury that Foster said, “they” or “we are going to burn the bridge”?

Answer. I don’t think I did. I have no recollection about it.

Question. How long before the burning of the bridge did you see Doctor Foster?

Answer. I could not tell you.

Question. About how long?

Answer. I can’t say.

Question. This conversation you had with the doctor and some one else took place how long before the burning of the bridge?

Answer. It was some two hours before I saw the smoke.

Question. Where were you then?

Answer. I was at Hunnewell two miles east of Salt River bridge.

Question. And at that conversation something was said in the doctor’s hearing about the burning of Salt River bridge?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. The doctor being present?

Answer. Yes; there were some other men present. There was a young man rode into the middle of the street and said, “If any man has property at the depot he had better take it out.” I had some salt there and I ran over and removed the salt, and as soon as I did that Doctor Foster was on the platform and said as I have told you.

Question. Did you ask him to save the cars?

Answer. The cars were burning.

Question. Foster was also present then?

Answer. He was on the platform right by the cars as they were burning. Some of them had been removed but the last car was standing there.

Question. Do you know anything of the second burning of Salt River bridge?

Answer. I do not. I was in the city then.

By the PRISONER:

Question. Do you know in what capacity I was there?

Answer. No, I do not. You had a kind of box hanging on your side. I don’t know what it was.

ROBERT H. GRIFFITH, M. D:, a witness on the part of the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. In Hannibal, Mo.

{p.399}

Question. Are you acquainted with Doctor Foster?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. You were one of the grand jury when Doctor Foster’s case was up for consideration in Saint Louis?

Answer. Yes; I was a juryman when his case was presented.

Question. Tell the court what you know of one Moss having testified to a conversation with Foster.

Answer. My recollection of it is that he did not say Foster went to his house. My memory though on that point may not be very distinct. My attention was called to this matter, however, specially. Mr. Moss as well as I recollect said that he saw Foster at Monroe or Hunnewell, and that Doctor Foster told him he intended burning Salt River bridge and that he left in the direction of Salt River bridge and went there, and that soon after he saw the smoke and that at a subsequent meeting he said he had burned it.

Question. Your best recollection is that Moss testified to that effect?

Answer. That is my best recollection of the testimony. I recollect very distinctly that the jurors or most of us believed there was testimony ample to predicate a bill upon, and we were about doing so having two witnesses to the same confession of the overt act, but we were informed by the district attorney in attendance that to find an indictment for treason there must be two witnesses to the overt act itself, and that his confession amounted to nothing at all unless it was made in open court.

Question. That was on a proposition to indict for treason?

Answer. That is so. This was considered by us an act under the charge of treason. Two witnesses testified to the acknowledgment of the same fact-that he was at the burning and that he set it on fire, or was with the party.

Question. You are satisfied in your own mind that two witnesses testified to the acknowledgment, and that basing your opinion upon the acknowledgments made by him and sworn to by two witnesses you would with other jurors have charged treason had it not been for the counsel of the district attorney?

Answer. Yes, sir; you exactly state the case.

Question. Who was the second witness?

Answer. I think it was Mrs. Evans. I am under that impression.

Question. But if she was not the party it was somebody else?

Answer. I know for certain it was given in evidence by two witnesses, and I think she was one of them and I know Moss was the other. I know we hunted over the testimony and the grand jury instructed to draw up a bill, and it would have been drawn up and signed but for the instructions we received of the district attorney.

Question. If mistaken as to the person, you are confident you are not mistaken as to the fact?

Answer. Not as to the fact.

Question. About what time was this?

Answer. In July last.

Question. Where?

Answer. At Saint Louis.

Question. Do you or did you know where Foster was at the time?

Answer. I knew Foster had been absent some time from Hannibal. For some time previous to my leaving for Saint Louis I had heard a great many reports as to his being out with guerrilla parties but did not of my own knowledge know his whereabouts.

{p.400}

Question. He was not at home?

Answer. No, sir; he had been some time absent before I left for Saint Louis. I left the early part of July.

The prisoner declined to ask any questions of this witness.

JOHN T. K. HAYWARD, citizen, a witness on the part of the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. At Hannibal, Mo.

Question. Are you an officer of the Hannibal and Saint Joseph Railroad Company?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. In what capacity are you employed?

Answer. Superintendent.

Question. Do you remember the date when Salt River bridge was first burned?

Answer. My recollection is that it [was] about the time of the fight at Monroe.

Question. About when?

Answer. About the 10th or 15th of July I think.

Question. About what time was it burned a second time?

Answer. I think it was about the 5th of September.

Question. About what time were certain cars burned at Hunnewell or near there?

Answer. When the bridge was burned the first time.

Question. How many cars were there burned?

Answer. I think not more than three.

The court adjourned to meet at 2 p.m. on this 22d day of January, 1862.

JOHN GROESBECK, Colonel Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers, President. HENRY BINMORE, Assistant Adjutant-General and Acting Judge-Advocate.

–––

JANUARY 22, 1862-2 p.m.

The military commission met pursuant to adjournment.

Present: Col. John Groesbeck, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers, president; Lieut. Col. Charles J. Tinkham, Twenty-sixth Illinois Volunteers; Capt. Henry T. McDowell, Company A. Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers; C apt. David C. Benjamin, Company I, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers; Capt. Henry Binmore, assistant adjutant-general, acting judge-advocate and recorder.

The case of Thomas S. Foster was continued.

JAMES M. MORRIS, citizen, a witness for the prosecution was duly sworn.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. At Hannibal, Mo.

{p.401}

Question. Are you acquainted with Thomas S. Foster?

Answer. Yes, sir; I have been very well acquainted with him in former days but not lately.

Question. Do you know anything about the burning of certain cars at Hunnewell or of the Salt River bridge?

Answer. No, sir; I went out to fix them up, but I don’t know who done it or anything about it.

Question. Did you hear anything of the burning?

Answer. Yes, sir; I tried to get over.

Question. How long after the bridge was burned?

Answer. The next day.

Question. Do you know anything of the parties who were present at the burnings?

Answer. No, sir; I was no nearer than Hannibal.

Question. What do you know in relation to whether Thomas S. Foster was engaged in either or both of those burnings?

Answer. I don’t know that he was engaged in it or not. All I know is that about the time the home guards were organized at Hannibal a good many of my friends was down on me for joining and the doctor and me had a good many talks about it one way and the other, and when the time the Sixteenth Illinois came (that was the first troops that landed at Hannibal) it bothered the doctor a good deal and I told him there would be a good many more than that here if they did not behave themselves, and he said he would be one of the men that would tear up the whole railroad before they should travel on it. I told him he was crazy and I thought it was nonsense for him to talk that way.

Question. What time was that conversation-during what month?

Answer. I don’t recollect. I think maybe it was in June.

Question. Might it have been in July?

Answer. Yes, sir; but I think if so it must have been early in the month.

Question. Was it before the burning of the bridge?

Answer. O, yes; it was before any great fuss was got up anyhow. His remark was he would be one to burn or tear up the railroad before they should travel over the road. I don’t know if he said burn or tear up.

By the PRISONER:

Question. Where were we when that conversation took place?

Answer. On the plank sidewalk I believe.

Question. What brought it up?

Answer. I don’t exactly remember now. I did not charge my memory with it anyway, but think it was the troops-talking about them that brought it up; they were going through to some place. I think that was it but am not positive. The troops though I am certain brought it up and you were opposed to the troops traveling on the road entirely.

The prisoner having declined to call any witnesses and having also declined to present any defense, the statements of the parties being thus in possession of the court and the court being cleared for deliberation and having maturely considered the evidence adduced find the accused, Thomas S. Foster, as follows:

Of the first specification, not proven.

Of the second specification, guilty.

Of the third specification, guilty.

Of the fourth specification, guilty.

{p.402}

Of the fifth specification, guilty.

Of the charge, guilty.

And the court do therefore sentence him, the said Thomas S. Foster, “to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department shall direct.”

JOHN GROESBECK, Colonel Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers. HENRY BINMORE, Assistant Adjutant-General and Acting Judge-Advocate.

Finding approved.

The sentence will be carried into effect at such time and place as may be hereafter designated by the general commanding department. In the meantime the prisoner will be confined in a cell of Alton prison.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

–––

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 20.}

HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, Mo., January 14, 1862.

I. At a military commission which convened at Palmyra, Mo., pursuant to Special Orders, No. 97, of December 27, 1861, from these headquarters, and of which Col. John Groesbeck, Thirty-ninth Ohio Volunteers, is president, were arraigned and tried-

...

James H. Benedict.

CHARGE: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that James H. Benedict did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the accused pleaded not guilty.

The commission finds the accused guilty and does therefore sentence him, James H. Benedict, to be held a prisoner subject to the orders of the major-general commanding the department.

Thomas Benedict.

CHARGE: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that Thomas Benedict did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the prisoner pleaded not guilty.

The commission finds the prisoner guilty and does therefore sentence him, Thomas Benedict, to be held a prisoner subject to the orders of the major-general commanding the department.

James W. Rumans.

CHARGE: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that James W. Rumans did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the accused pleaded guilty.

The commission finds the accused guilty and does therefore sentence him, James W. Rumans, to be retained in custody subject to the orders of the major-general commanding the department.

{p.403}

Ransom Batterdon.

CHARGE: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that Ransom Batterdon did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the accused pleaded guilty.

The commission finds the accused guilty and does therefore sentence him Ransom Batterdon, to be retained in custody subject to the orders of the major-general commanding the department.

...

James P. Tuggle.

CHARGE: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification .-In this, that James F. Tuggle did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which charge and specification the accused pleaded guilty.

The commission finds the prisoner guilty and does therefore sentence him, James P. Tuggle, to be retained in custody subject to the orders of the major-general commanding the department.

...

George H. F. Jones.

CHARGE 1: Giving aid and comfort to bridge-burners.

Specification.-In this, that he, the said George H. F. Jones, did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 2: Treason against the United States Government.

Specification.-In this, that the said George H. F. Jones did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer of the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the prisoner pleaded:

To the first charge, not guilty.

To the second charge, guilty.

The commission finds the accused:

Of the first charge and specification, guilty.

Of the second charge and specification, guilty.

And does therefore sentence him, George H. F. Jones, to be retained in custody subject to the orders of the major-general commanding the department.

James R. J. Jones.

CHARGE 1: Giving aid and comfort to bridge-burners.

Specification.-In this, that the said James R. J. Jones did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 2: Treason against the United States Government.

Specification-In this, that the said James R. J. Jones did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer of the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the prisoner pleaded:

To the first charge, not guilty.

To the second charge, guilty.

{p.404}

The commission finds the accused:

Of the first charge and specification, guilty.

Of the second charge and specification, guilty.

And does therefore sentence him, the said James R. J. Jones, to be retained in custody subject to the orders of the major-general commanding the department.

Thomas M. Smith.

CHARGE 1: Bridge and railroad and car burning.

Specification.-That on the night of the 20th of December, 1861, the said Thomas M. Smith with other persons unknown did unlawfully within the Military District of North Missouri burn and destroy one railroad bridge known as the Sturgeon bridge and also one other railroad bridge known as the Long Branch bridge, and certain railroad ties, rails, tanks and cars, which bridges, ties, rails, tanks and cars formed a part of the common traveled way known as the North Missouri Railroad. This in violation of martial law prevailing in the said Military District of North Missouri and in the State of Missouri.

CHARGE 2: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-In this, that the said Thomas M. Smith did on the evening or night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, track, rails and cars being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-In this, that the said Thomas M. Smith did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 3: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that Thomas M. Smith did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the accused pleaded:

To the first charge, not guilty.

To the second charge, guilty.

To the third charge, guilty.

The commission finds the accused:

Of the first charge and specification, guilty.

Of the second charge and specification, guilty:

Of the third charge and specification, guilty.

And does therefore sentence him, Thomas M. Smith, to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department shall direct.

...

Stephen Stott.

CHARGE 1: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-In this, that the said Stephen Stott did on the evening or night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, track, rails and cars being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-In this, that the said Stephen Stott did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad and sundry cars upon said track.

CHARGE 2: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that Stephen Stott did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the accused pleaded guilty.

{p.405}

The commission finds the prisoner:

Of the charges and specifications, guilty.

And does therefore sentence the said Stephen Stott to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department may select.

...

George H. Cunningham.

CHARGE 1: Bridge, railroad and car burning.

Specification-In this, that on the night of the 20th of December, 1861, the said George H. Cunningham with other persons unknown did unlawfully within the Military District of North Missouri burn and destroy one railroad bridge known as the Sturgeon bridge and also one other railroad bridge known as the Long Branch bridge, and certain railroad ties, rails, tanks and cars, which bridges, rails, ties, tanks and cars formed a part of the common traveled way known as the North Missouri Railroad. This in violation of martial law prevailing in the said Military District of North Missouri and in the State of Missouri.

CHARGE 2: Giving aid and comfort to bridge and railroad burners.

Specification 1.-In this, that the said George H. Cunningham did on the evening or night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, meet with other parties unknown and plot the destruction of two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and certain ties, track, rails and cars being part of and appertaining to the North Missouri Railroad.

Specification 2.-In this, that the said George H. Cunningham did by his presence and advice upon the evening and night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, aid and assist and afford comfort and assistance to a party of armed men who on the night of Friday, the 20th of December, 1861, burned and destroyed two railroad bridges, to wit, the Sturgeon bridge and the Long Branch bridge, and the track or a portion thereof of the North Missouri Railroad and sundry cars upon the said track.

CHARGE 3: Treason against the Government of the United States.

Specification-In this, that George H. Cunningham did assume an attitude of open rebellion against the Federal Government by taking up arms against the same and by assuming and exercising the functions, duties and powers of a soldier or officer in the rebel army within the limits proper of the State of Missouri from and after or about the 19th day of December, 1861.

To which the prisoner pleaded:

To the first charge, not guilty.

To the second charge, guilty.

To the third charge, guilty.

The commission finds the prisoner:

Of the first charge and specification, guilty.

Of the second charge and specifications, guilty.

Of the third charge and specification, guilty.

And does therefore sentence him, George H. Cunningham, to be shot to death at such time and place as the major-general commanding the department shall direct.

...

II. The findings of the commission on all charges of treason are disapproved as such charges were not triable by a military commission. (See Rule 6, announced in General Orders, No. 1, current series, from these headquarters.) The other findings on other charges in the cases of John C. Tompkins, William J. Forshey, John Patton, Thomas M. Smith, Stephen Stott, George H. Cunningham, Richard B. Crowder and George M. Pulliam are approved, and the sentences awarded them will be carried into effect at the time and place to be hereafter designated by the general commanding the department. Brig. Gen. B. M. Prentiss will notify the prisoners of the decision of the commission in their respective cases and warn them to prepare for the execution. He will see that the prisoners are thoroughly guarded so as to prevent the possibility of escape. Any one attempting to escape will be instantly shot down.

The remanding to prison in the cases of James H. Benedict, Thomas Benedict, James W. Rumans, Ransom Batterdon, James P. Tuggle, George H. F. Jones, James R. J. Jones, John S. Mitchell, Austin Crisman and John Powell to be held as prisoners subject to the orders of {p.406} the department commander is approved, as their cases “must be tried by courts duly constituted by law.” (See Rule 6, announced in General Orders, No. 1, headquarters Department of the Missouri, 1862.)

The action of the commission in the cases of Sterling Coulter, Albert Pulliam, Robert M. Hannah, Samuel Croff, Barzillia Powell and Lafayette Wright, viz, ordering their release after administering to each the oath of allegiance, was improper. These prisoners should have been remanded to prison and kept there until their cases had been submitted to and acted upon by the officer commanding the department.

When several persons are to be tried by the same court-martial or commission upon different charges the court or commission should be re-sworn at the commencement of each trial, and the record of each case made up separately.

By order of Major-General Halleck:

JNO. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

–––

Trial of John W. Owen for bridge-burning, destroying railroads, etc.

A military commission of which Lieut. Col. Samuel A. Holmes is president convened at Wellsville, Mo., pursuant to Special Orders, No. 28, namely:

SPECIAL ORDERS, No. 28.

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE Missouri, Saint Louis, January 10, 1862.

The order for the military commission to meet at Wellsville by Special Orders, No. 17, on January 8, 1862, current series from these headquarters, is hereby revoked and the following detail substituted, to meet on Monday, January 13, 1862, at 10 o’clock, or as soon thereafter as practicable, for the trial of such persons as may be brought before it: Lieut. Col. Samuel A. Holmes, Tenth Missouri Volunteers; Capt. Richard Y. Lanius, Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers; Capt. A. C. Todd, Tenth Missouri Volunteers; Surg. Thomas O. Edwards, Third Iowa Volunteers; Capt. Martin Armstrong, Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers, who will act as judge-advocate and recorder. The Commission will meet without regard to hours.

By order Major-General Halleck:

J. C. KELTON, Assistant Adjutant-General.

SAINT LOUIS, January 15, 1862.

Brigadier-General SCHOFIELD:

The military commission ordered to meet at Wellsville is authorized to sit at any point on the North Missouri Railroad which may be designated by Brigadier-General Schofield.

H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

WARRENTON, January 15, 1862.

Major HESCOCK:

If General Halleck authorizes the commission to go to Danville telegraph to Colonel Morton. Let Mr. Gamble have the engine.

J. M. SCHOFIELD.

DANVILLE, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MO., January 28, 1862.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment and the foregoing orders.

Present: Lieut. Col. Samuel A. Holmes, Tenth Missouri Volunteers; Capt. Richard Y. Lanius, Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers; Capt. A. C. Todd, Tenth Missouri Volunteers; Capt. M. Armstrong, judge-advocate, Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers.

{p.407}

John W. Owen, the accused, also present.

The judge-advocate, having read the order convening the court asked the accused John W. Owen, if he had any objection to any member named therein; to which he replied, “I have not.” The commission was then duly sworn by the judge-advocate and the judge-advocate was duly sworn by the presiding officer of the commission in the presence of the accused.

The accused, John W. Owen, here begged the privilege of introducing Walter L. Lovelace, esq., as his counsel which was granted by the commission.

The charges were then read aloud by the judge-advocate, as follows:

CHARGE 1: Destroying railroad and railroad property.

Specification.-In this, that the said John W. Owen on or about the 20th day of December, 1861, in the counties of Montgomery and Audrain in the State of Missouri and within the lines occupied by the troops of the United States did unlawfully, wilfully and maliciously tear up, burn and destroy the rails, railroad track, ties, bridges, depots and other buildings of the North Missouri Railroad Company (so called) contrary to the laws and customs of war in like cases.

CHARGE 2: Destroying telegraph lines.

Specification-In this, that the said John W. Owen on or about the 20th day of December, 1861, in the counties of Audrain and Montgomery in the State of Missouri and within the lines occupied by the troops of the United States did unlawfully, wilfully and maliciously cut down and destroy the telegraph poles and wires of the U. S. military telegraph along the line of the North Missouri Railroad in the said counties of Montgomery and Audrain contrary to the laws and customs of war in like cases.

CHARGE 3: Aiding and abetting in the destruction of railroads.

Specification.-In this, that the said John W. Owen on or about the 20th day of December, 1861, in the counties of Audrain and Montgomery in the State of Missouri and within the lines occupied by the troops of the United States did wilfully, unlawfully and maliciously meet with certain unlawful and armed bands and advised and counseled the destruction of the North Missouri Railroad track, ties, bridges, buildings and other property of the North Missouri Railroad Company, and did then and there in pursuance of such advice give aid and assistance to said persons in the destruction of said railroad contrary to the laws and customs of war in like cases.

CHARGE 4: Falsely assuming the character of a military officer.

Specification.-In this, that the said John W. Owen on or about the 15th day of December, 1861, and for a long time thereafter in the counties of Audrain and Montgomery in the State of Missouri and within the lines occupied by the troops of the United States did wilfully and falsely assume and adopt the character of a military officer and did then and there falsely represent and pretend that he was duly commissioned and qualified to act as a captain in the belligerent forces at war with the United States, and then and there in such assumed character did commit and incite others to commit acts of hostility against the United States and the property of citizens thereof contrary to the laws and customs of war in like cases.

M. ARMSTRONG, Captain and Judge-Advocate.

The judge-advocate then asked the accused, John W. Owen: “You have heard the charges preferred against you; how say you, guilty or not guilty?” To which the accused, John W. Owen, pleaded as follows:

To specification, first charge, not guilty.

To first charge, not guilty.

To specification, second charge, not guilty.

To second charge, not guilty.

To specification, third charge, not guilty.

To third charge, not guilty.

To specification, fourth charge, not guilty.

To fourth charge, not guilty

{p.408}

The commission then proceeded in the examination of the case of John W. Owen, as follows:

Col. THOMAS MORTON, Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers, being produced, duly sworn and examined on the part of the United States testifies as follows:

I am in the military service of the United States. I rank as colonel commanding the Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers, U. S. Army. I know the prisoner, John W. Owen. I met Mr. Owen somewhere in Callaway County about the 28th day of December, 1861. I did not see Mr. Owen at the time he was captured on the 28th of December, 1861. I learned that we had captured a man of the rebel forces, and the first time I saw Captain Owen I saw him with Major Hescock. I know that he (Captain Owen) was placed in arrest. He was placed in the hands of one of the captains of the Tenth Missouri Regiment as a prisoner of war. I believe he was taken along that day and on the first morning after the arrest there was a complaint made to me by divers persons of the treatment of the prisoners. I relieved at this time Captain Lanius of all other duties and placed the prisoners in his charge and among them Capt. John W. Owen, and from that time on I had charge of them during the campaign. I saw the captain frequently every day during our campaign. I spoke to them as I passed during the campaign. After we had stopped the march I had opportunity to talk with the prisoners. I began an investigation of their cases. I had a conversation with Capt. John W. Owen at this place (Danville). The prisoners were then in my exclusive charge. I sent for Captain Owen to come to my quarters. I had a long talk with him. In that conversation he admitted to me that he ranked as a captain, the commanding officer of twenty-seven men in the rebel service, whom he had recruited for Price’s army. He also stated that he had joined Colonel Dorsey’s command about the 26th of December, and on his return home for the purpose of procuring clothing for his men he met our forces and was arrested. He stated he was not in the fight but presumed that his men were. I think the admissions that the captain made to me were freely made. I used no force to my knowledge. They were freely made and I think substantially true. He stated to me also that he and his men were engaged in the destruction of the North Missouri Railroad. If I understood the captain right he stated to me that he and his men had charge of a separate section of the road to destroy it; that they did destroy this section and justified the act by saying, “I acted according to military orders;” that he understood the orders were from General Price; that he received his orders (written) from Lieutenant Jamison, and that they came from Quartermaster Norton, who lives in Callaway County. Ho thinks he ranks as lieutenant-colonel but is not positive. He stated that this written order directed him to take charge of and destroy a certain specific division he and his command were to act upon. He also stated that he and some of his men were opposed to the destruction of the railroad but that they obeyed as a military necessity. He also stated that the tools they used in the destruction of the railroad were furnished by his men. They got some from blacksmith shops. I remember about his telling me that he got a crowbar made to his special order split at the end, suited to draw spikes. The blacksmith who made it was a member of his company. The captain appeared free to give me all information as to what he had done.

Question. When and where did he tell you these men were raised?

Answer. I think he said he had enlisted his men about the 13th of December, 1861.

He said he had enlisted some at Williamsburg, some on the borders of Hancock Prairie.

Question. Did he tell you when he had received his instructions for the destruction of the road?

Answer. He told me he had received his orders written from Lieutenant Jamison; that they came from Quartermaster Norton. I do not know when or where he received them. He did not tell me.

Question. Did you understand from him as to whether he raised his men before or after he received the orders for the destruction of the railroad?

Answer. I did not ask that question nor did I hear it answered. I understood from the conversation that he had raised a part of his men before he had received the orders to destroy the railroad. I will also state that he told me he had not been in the rebel service previous to this except that he had been in Jones’ command at Fulton. I asked him where they had been in the habit of having their meetings and {p.409} he answered that they had had but two meetings before they started on this expedition. He did not tell where those meetings were held. He told me that he and his men met at a sugar camp near Wingfield’s Saw-Mill the night before they went to destroy railroad. I understood that that meeting was the same night that the railroad was destroyed. He stated to me that his orders were to destroy a specific division of the North Missouri Railroad between Wellsville and the city of Mexico. I think he stated that his division or section was the second one from Wellsville toward Mexico. I don’t think he stated whether the men were armed or not.

Question. By whom did Captain Owen say his men were sworn in?

Answer. I do not remember the man’s name who swore them in. He gave the name. I took it down in writing.

Question. Did he describe to you the manner in which he and his men destroyed the railroad?

Answer. He said that they had crowbars with forks on the end to draw the spikes; that they sprained the rails, burned the ties and tore up the culverts.

Question. Did he state to you that there were others engaged with him besides his men in the destruction of the railroad?

Answer. I asked him if another man did not command a party operating on the railroad from Wellsville to Martinsburg. He answered that there were other persons engaged in the destruction of the road. His orders were to a specific division of the road. Others were above him.

Question. Did he state to you whether there was any concerted plan for the destruction of the road? If so what did he state about it and what was it?

Answer. He did not. I did not ask him whether he had any conversation with any others, for I was satisfied in my own mind that he had.

Cross-examination by DEFENDANT:

Question. Did not Owen state that he had enlisted his men on the 13th and received orders to tear up the railroad the Wednesday before the road was torn up, which was Friday, the 20th?

Answer. He did not state that he enlisted his men on the 13th instant. He said they were sworn in on the 13th. It is not my recollection that he stated to me the date of his orders for the destruction of the road. He might have told me but I do not recollect.

Question. Did you understand by the expedition spoken of the tearing up of the road or what transpired since?

Answer. I asked him where they had been in the habit of holding their meetings. He answered that they had had but two meetings previous to starting, and I inferred that he meant, previous to going to join Dorsey’s command. I understood that one of those meetings was for the purpose of being sworn in and that the other for the purpose of destroying the said road.

Question. In speaking of divisions of the road did he say how long the divisions were?

Answer. He did not.

Question. Did he not state that his division should begin as near Wellsville as practicable?

Answer. It is not my recollection that there was anything said about it by him to me.

Question. Did he state how he was ordered to tear up or destroy the road?

Answer. I do not think he said anything about it.

{p.410}

ROBERT G. MCLEAN, assistant surgeon of Eighty-first Ohio Volunteers, being produced, duly sworn and examined on the part of the United States testifies as follows:

Question. Do you know the prisoner here present-John W. Owen?

Answer. I know him when I meet him.

Question. You recognize him as being a prisoner held here in custody?

Answer. Yes. I know him as having represented himself as being Capt. John W. Owen of the rebel service.

Question. Were you present at any time when Colonel Morton had conversation with the prisoner?

Answer. I was present once when Colonel Morton questioned him pretty thoroughly and noted down his answers.

Question. State then what was the nature of that conversation.

(The witness, here referring to the memorandum then taken for the purpose of refreshing his memory, testified as follows:)

He said: “My name is John W. Owen. I was arrested in Callaway County; belonged to Colonel Dorsey’s command; was captain of a company; had twenty-seven men. Joined Dorsey’s command on the 26th of December, 1861. Recruited my men in Callaway County. I was not in the fight at Mount Zion; my men were, I suppose. Our object was to go to Price’s army. I was not out previously, except in Colonel Jones’ command, of some time back (this was at the time the compromise was made between Jones and Henderson). My men were principally from Williamsburg and vicinity, and were sworn into the service on the 13th of December, 1861, on the farm of Thomas Anderson, three and a half miles south of Williamsburg, at a vacant house. I know Captain Meyers by sight. Had only two meetings of my company before starting out. I am acquainted with James Owen; he is an uncle of mine, and was a member of my company; he brought his own gun with him. I know James England; he is a reliable man, and is reported a Union man. I know Dr. John B. Gregory, and know from report he is a Union man. I know William Garrett; think he has never been in the rebel service; I think he had a son in it. Henry Hall lives east of south of Williamsburg, on Hancock Prairie; I do not know how he stands. I know his son-in-law, John Crawford. George McMahon was a member of my company; I think he is a son of Jesse McMahon. I know Joseph Everheart. John Williams was in the rebel army some three months, but has returned. James Anderson’s son Watt is said to have been in Price’s army; also his grandson, Thomas Norfolk Anderson. I suppose they are in the army still. Leroy Owen, my cousin, was in my company. We got most of the tools used in destroying the railroad from members of my company, some from blacksmiths’ shops, some of them from Walker F. Field, a blacksmith, who was in my company. I was acting under military orders. My orders (written) were delivered to me by Lieutenant Jamison. They came from Quartermaster Norton. I think he lives in the western part of Callaway County, and think he ranks as lieutenant-colonel. My orders were to a specific division of the road. Lieutenant Jamison lives in the northern part of Callaway County. My orders were signed by Quartermaster Norton, by order of General Price. My company operated by itself. Myself and some of men objected to the work but obeyed as a military necessity. We met at a sugar camp near Wingfield’s Saw-Mill, seven or eight miles from the railroad.”

Question. Did Captain Owen say where he resided? and if so where?

Answer. I think he said he resided near Williamsburg.

Question. Did you understand him to state that he had never been in military service except his going out with Jones?

Answer. I think that was his statement.

Question. Did he state when he was out with Jones?

Answer. Not definitely. He referred to the time when the compromise was made between Henderson and Jones.

{p.411}

Question. Did he claim that that was the only time or instance in which he had taken up arms except this late affair?

Answer. I so understood him.

Question. When according to his statement did he again claim to recognize the instructions of a military officer?

Answer. About the 13th of December, 1861.

Question. Will you explain by what authority and in what capacity he claimed to be acting.

Answer. By authority of General Price.

Question. Did he claim to be acting by the authority of General Price in the raising of his company or in the destruction of the railroad?

Answer. He did not state as to that. He claimed to be raising his company for Price’s army.

Question. Did he claim to have or did he produce any military commission or authority?

Answer. Nothing written. He claimed verbally that he had the authority.

Question. What I mean is did he claim to have a regular commission?

Answer. He did not claim to have a regular commission.

Question. What was the particular authority through which he claimed to be acting?

Answer. As far as the destruction of the railroad was concerned he claimed to be acting [under] the orders of General Price transmitted regularly through other officers to him.

Question. You say that he stated he had but two meetings of his company before starting out; starting where?

Answer. Starting to join Price.

Question. Did he state to you the purpose of either of these meetings?

Answer. He did as to one of them-the meeting in the sugar camp near the saw-mill-which meeting he said he held for the purpose of adopting measures for the destruction of the North Missouri Railroad.

Question. Did he state to you what followed upon the meeting and consultation at Wingfield’s Saw-Mill?

Answer. That they proceeded to do the work assigned to them in destroying the railroad.

Question. Did he state to you how many men were engaged with him in that enterprise?

Answer. I don’t think he did definitely.

Question. Did he claim to have any direction or command in the work of destroying the railroad?

Answer. He did not say directly that he had command. He said he was averse to the work and so was some of his men.

Question. Did he show or did he claim to have in his possession any written orders?

Answer. Not in any way; some saying his orders were written.

Question. Did he offer to show any?

Answer. He did not.

{p.412}

Question. Did he claim that any one else had assisted him in recruiting these men?

Answer. He did not.

Question. When did he claim to have received those orders-before recruiting these men or afterward?

Answer. He did not specify any further than having the order to destroy the railroad. I would say in Captain Owen’s favor that he distinctly scouted the idea of having any connection with Cobb and such jayhawkers. He disclaimed any participation with them.

Question. Did be claim to have any commission or authority before proceeding to recruit these men?

Answer. He did not that I recollect of.

Cross-examination by DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY:

Question. Did he state whether he actually destroyed the road or that he only collected his men for that purpose?

Answer. He stated that they assembled at the sugar camp near Wingfield’s Saw-Mill for the purpose of destroying the road and after they did their work dispersed.

Question. You say he did not show any written orders? Did he not say that his papers were in his trunk and that he had destroyed the order to burn the road?

Answer. To the best of my recollection he did so state.

Re-examination by COMMISSION:

Question. Did he state why he had destroyed the order to burn the railroad?

Answer. He did not state why.

The testimony on the part of the United States is hereby closed.

Testimony on the part of the defense:

MARSHALL BOSWELL, being produced, duly sworn and examined on the part of the defense testifies as follows:

Question. Are you acquainted with the defendant-John W. Owen?

Answer. Yes, sir; I am somewhat acquainted with him.

Question. Were you present at Thomas L. Anderson’s, at the Nine-Mile Prairie, on or about the 13th of December last?

Answer. I was.

Question. Did you see the defendant there at that time?

Answer. I did.

Question. Will you state what you saw and heard about the defendant’s raising and mustering in a company into Price’s service on that day.

Answer. There was a company raised there by a gentleman from Price who said he was a recruiting officer. Mr. Owen then was elected captain by that company. They were sworn into the service by the same gentleman.

Question. What was the gentleman’s name?

Answer. His name was Grant. I do not know what his given name was.

Question. For what period were they sworn in?

Answer. For twelve months.

{p.413}

Question. Did you know whether this Mr. Grant was authorized to swear in men or by what authority he swore them in?

Answer. I don’t know that I do.

Question. Did you hear him state on that day what his authority was?

Answer. Well, his authority was from Price was all I know about-was all I heard about it.

Cross-examination on the part of the UNITED STATES:

Question. Where did you reside at the time of the meeting spoken of?

Answer. In Callaway County, northeast part, in Nine-Mile Prairie Township.

Question. How far from Williamsburg?

Answer. About six miles northeast from Williamsburg.

Question. How far from the place where you were sworn in?

Answer. I should reckon about nine miles.

Question. How long have you resided there?

Answer. About twelve or fourteen years-twelve years I reckon.

Question. Where does this prisoner reside?

Answer. I believe he lives in Williamsburg when he is at home.

Question. How long has he lived there?

Answer. Well, you are too hard for me now; I could not tell you how long he has lived there-six or eight months I know.

Question. When and where did you first become acquainted with him?

Answer. In Williamsburg; this summer-in June or July-somewhere along there.

Question. How did you happen to become acquainted with him?

Answer. I could not tell you now. I was acquainted with some of his connection and I think I became acquainted with him through them.

Question. Did you first see him in Williamsburg?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Had you any business then with him?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. How often did you see him after that?

Answer. I don’t know that I ever met him but once and that was when they took him prisoner.

Question. Where did they take him prisoner?

Answer. I am not much acquainted with the place where they took him.

Question. You met him then though?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Was you with him there?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. How did you meet him then?

Answer. I was with him in the ranks as a prisoner.

Question. Then those were the only times you ever saw him?

Answer. O, no; I saw him several times before that in Williamsburg.

Question. Then you frequently saw him in Williamsburg?

Answer. Some several times. I never went to Williamsburg very often.

{p.414}

Question. Has he a family residing in Williamsburg?

Answer. He says he has one living there.

Question. What is his business there?

Answer. I think he is a wagon-maker by trade. I never saw him to work at it.

Question. When did you last see him in Williamsburg?

Answer. The last day I recollect of seeing him there was the day he was sworn in-on the 13th of December.

Question. He had continued to reside there up to that time so far as you know?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. How far is the place where you were sworn in from Williamsburg?

Answer. Something like three miles-at Thomas Anderson’s so said.

Question. Did you go there with him?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Who asked you to go?

Answer. I went of my own accord.

Question. Anybody go with you?

Answer. There were several went.

Question. Was the prisoner one of them?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. How many went with you?

Answer. I suppose some four or five.

Question. Did the prisoner know you were to be there?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Did you know he was to be there?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Was he there when you got there?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Who else did you find there?

Answer. I found Mr. John Owen, Mr. Shull, William Meyers, Bently Hays and Mr. Swerenger there. Men by the name of Grant, Hays and Shull went with me. I don’t remember the others who went with me; I know them when I see them.

Question. Did you know that the defendant was to be there when you went?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Where did you go from?

Answer. From home to Williamsburg; from Williamsburg to that place.

Question. Did you see the defendant in Williamsburg that day?

Answer. I saw him on that day-in the evening, an hour by sun. After we went over to this place he came