The New York herald., 1864-11-04
The REV YORK tlscrioN FRAUDS.


Trial sf.Coionel NORTH. Levi Cohen ana
N. n. Jones before q Military Ceuasais :
Sion az Washin nston-opening Pisns Of
tho Counsel for tus Accuseds aAd ths
Juags Advocate, SC.
wAssnarcs, Nov. 8, 1884.
The trial Of Colonel Samuel North the New York stat
agent, end Lsvi Uohen and IT, n. Jones' epcs1
today before ths Uoiscd states Mhtsry Comu,isscn,
wh,cs General Doubleday "a President, aud Colonel J.
Foster Jsdge Advocate. Nsssrs. r. H. Gillette and
IcPhersou appeared as counsel for Who prisoners.
The above named prisoners, together with Reeves d
Schoasd charged with conduct prsjuai0iaI 70 Tod
order aud military discipline, and OF fraud tow4ds
he Nev York stale esctors, in trat they forged zoe
oanes OF ciacors and soldiers to what purporet $cs
ballots OF said soldiers 10 bo used ~ the election
held on Tuesday next. They also changed $nh
falsely and sSsuduenty issuing divers ard susers hnNS
when purpored TO bs ssgoed by ofOsss r-t .oldcrsp
the military service Of tho unitod States, authofizng
csrtsiu parties cast their the Stp
end 1stionsi elections, with inseGt 70 dersud tns se
esctor Of his rights. I
Mr. Gle,te QUO Of tho counsel for tho prsonerb
Headed to the Jurisdiction sf the oot arguing shat ~
court hEi no jrisoicon; arst the parties se1t
ondy he sabjeo. matter thirdly, tha, The ns,t
mol within the Jurisdiction Of the national aoyera
nicnt, fourthiy, that was . subject over whcM
tas na,onn government had never legisiaicd; audi
ithi?, thofe federal goyornmenkt
anhorszDs tho iurisdctioa Of military court for fhk
trial OF any one not !" the military service Of the Uned
States 81
Mr. Gillette srsaed that the federal tribunals had po
IN any manner authorized the trial OF persons by
. federal court for crimes conmtted against the
5~s OF any state or Ststsa II te accused had commit
ted crine, IL was only violation VI statute Of the
stats Of New York aud consequently the tribunals the
United dates had Jurisdiction. II had
committed, was against the laws VI New York. and
thst sano law rescribss he ronses and moics Of trial
ana punishment. II oience was committed In any
olbsr against Of of New York. uBdsr
the kx,raaiiL law the party cnarssd Win the crime 's
charged have not committed crime against The state oG
Nov York, must appear, a1rmatveiy, that the ne
10 oue against .ne statute laws OF the uued States az
has oeen decided that there be no eence against
the Uoited Ste.o nnless It is specially made go BY
stssnts loot aysrred tnat the prisoners have com
mil ted M offence Ggsiret the statutes OF the United
staies fbe ccruuinn law offences In the United
States Ind II is expressly ruled that what common
law Offences Of EDglaud are not offences against the
uAitsd states No offence snch these prisoners
charged with has beer created bv statute Of tbe utsd
s'aies aad cgg-g9usa:y ,ns lriblHal haS 10 jarsdo
r5wsss ssss Sssa ossfesT5d upon i 70 try oassy,
and man cannot be srraigusd when y is mposs'De 10
put yoar hnerr u law designating The criufc. WHAT
.caid TIE onec, this ceuf! assured TO execute Tho
laws oi tho state Of Nov York; Would acqnIise q
convection stop the mou'h ongce OF justice ia Eew
Yo'xY VIII this or any other i,bunai ASSUME 10 do.
prive New York OF viLd,catina hor qWh laws 10 u,at
.ers o. aha the docis'on may be hero. the State OF
Now York demands the ouepd.r, there ~ ane, and
insists receiving INN. IT, IS the Justice Of New York
,eas mus, oye,.o.s these aen they nave hcen guilty
pun snnsp; ros their violation. SBut
bunmanent heref there 10 no limit, then
cannot 90 There are IN this matter grave con
sequences, both to the laws OF the country and 10
the parties charged II is theory OF ell courts that
general jurisdiction, that, before they can
carry Tito oter their tnu!ngs they must make up tho
record; and what iaw this cite giving them
Jurisdiction this casss VIII they assume w. because
is would been proper subject for iegieation1
ordered Pueba during tho Mexican war BY an ohcer
named Hughes lsod he Was aterward mucted 10 heavy
dam yes the district court because the military court
had jurisdiction over tho ofance cnarged The c,un.
ke tsfd believed In s sn1erly That this Court lad
raaictio1 the IL The parties chsrHed
with had been 10 the service Of tbe Uned States
and psd been subject military order. the court would
then have mad jurisdiction.
Col, Foster Judls Advocate 10 rcly said n the last
argurre en Mr. Gillette true, then ,ary com
could Dot try or guerrilla tor they we're NOT
right trial by Jury right 10 which all claimed 10 DO
cuti,led Yo; srcria could not demand such q trial,
nor could traitor demapd 70 be Indicted 10 court be-
trial. In time OF war certain peace powers were
Veandighain u quoted arEelv from The dsci
sioh United States supreme Court the applica
tiop Mr. Pugh Tor saaEdynans reeass, To show thui
they recognized tho fact that urgent and peculiar coses
military bad luii power and jnrisdIetion. 10 all
these cses condition or hs country must
be considered u is charged thst The rights Of the
soldiers nave been violated they In The ned,
aud state where there are rccosbned by courts
OF law, Hilary Tribunals are the proper cnes 10 taAe
note o. the Atier The District OF Columbia has boon
considered N the Held The parties charged with
GucD,y Gssum1g The fact that soders The held nss
been derauaei and by parties also IN The Ged, they
eere apcnsbe to To military court as The only
having any prorer ilrisdict'on
Al tne conc uyou OF colonel Fosters remarks tho colrl
adjourned Mr. Giottss request until tea O'Clock TO-
morrow morning