The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1865-12-21

&c, DC.
SUPREME COURr--CHAnbEn6.
Before Judge Leonard
Eleven O'Clock vesterday was set down ~ the hour
nj which General Hooker commanded 70 produce
the body OF Robert Martin confined IN Fort Laaye'e on
the double charges Of hotci burning and being 70
bel spy
shortly .stcr the hour namod Martin brought into
court guarded carefully by two United States soldiers
and lieutenant The prisoner Is perfect typo Of the
medium class of Southerners His age may DO about
thirty His hair and mustache Of light color,
with a pale complexion and clear, blue eye Slightly
built and altred in hight gray frock coat plaid panta
looms and dark vest his appearance gives strong evidence
Of decision and determination.
Mr.. s. G. Courtney, on behalf Of the government, 3D.
dressed the Court and remarked that In conformity with
the order issued Monday had been considered best
obey that order and therefore produced the body OF
Robert Martin Before presenting the whole case IN de-
tail he would present an additional return.
Mr. Larocque said that before counsel proceeded he
had an objection TO offer. 1t important that the prs
should be placed In such position that he could
hold consultation with him. He would ask his Honor TO
exercise the authority which had under the statute to
person else that might b. dSemed pDper so that he
tMr Larocque} might have tho NECESSARY intercourse
Fort Lafayette he could no. have thaI intercourse.
Judge Leonardo win not dispose Of that quessien
Mr. Larocquo wished to consult the prisoner I'M
Judge leonard saw no objectA for that course, and
said that the officer could remain with him. q
Mr. Courtney here read the additional return Of General
Hooker, as follows
Supreme Cour-In the Matsr the Application Of Robert
Martha And the said Joseph Hooker SO duly and law
fully commanding aforesaid for further additional
re and returns that the setting IRE
to the city OF New York, aforesaid was done In the
night time and to houses IN which there were human
beings whose names unknown to the subscriber aud
tho time Of such burning as aforesaid the said
Martin was officer Of the SO called Confederate govern
I'm nonfn lnvfgu
authority Of the United States. And further certify and
return that at the time the said Martin was such spy, as
aforesaid at the time and place aforesaid, he was an
officer OF the so-caed Confederate army, in rebellion
against the government and lawful authority OF the
United States and tina, a. sven me as as aia
gused and assumed the dress Of citizen and WINS not
dressed in the military dress OF an officer OF the so called
Confederate army and at the time and place aorc
said found lurking about and acting spy OF the So
called in aS q the 5e6eon
Sworn to before me- this 10th day Of December 1885,
r. c. Elliott, Notary Public, New York city
Mr. Iarocque, at the conclusion Of the reading adj
yanccd 10 the end OF tho court room with Martin. He
was closely followed by the lieutenant in charge
Mr. Larocque-I desire to consult with the prisoner
alone.
Judge Leonard-There is no danger Of his escaping
think the officer might stand ten PAGES from him.
The lieutenant occupied position as desired, when
counsel conferred for about ten minutes with the prs
oner
Mr. Larocque then remarked that it would be neccs-
say for him TO file traverse for which he would require
time.
Judge Leonard thought the main question Tor MIN 10
decide whether not the orders Of the President
to be obeycd He could not 60 into the merits Of
the
Mr. Larocque said the prisoner had not been charged
upon the oath OF any party, with any offence whatever
Judge Leonard asked if they wanted to take any tes
Mr. Larocque answered that he wanted 70 traverse the
prisoner being in any way spy or being connected with
the offence set down In tho return.
Judge Leonard again remarked thas he could NOT enter
into the merits OF the case -~
Mr. Larocque asserted that there was nothing attached
tha VAf Hin
should deur to the return, and argue in that shape
After determining the legal points to the line Of argu
the writ II conceded in the return that during the
existence Of the rebellion the prisoner at the bar an
month Of December 1884, set IRE 10 dwelling houses in
the city Of Now York, and also TO several public build
ings That the first offence specified in the return.
The second was that he came to the State Of New York
in the capacity OF spy. For those two offences the
President Of the United States by virtue Of law, had
directed that the prisoner should be tried here by mill
tary tribunal or military commission. The offence
committed in 1864 Was that sfence committed by
Confederate officer offence trabe BY military COM
missiong Was offence in violation OF the laws of
war? Tho crime OF was undoubtedly ono OF the
most serious violations Of the laws OF war. Was IL not
then trabe by iary commission He tMr. Courtney
thought that every sensible lawyer was OF that opinion
II was an offence during the war; the question arose as
TO the facts whether the lapse OF time the sup
preston Of the rebellion had altered the status Of affairs
He could safely cay not. Tho power Of the military
Courtney here read several authorities to subsantiao his
argument, quoting, among others, tried three
been convened and prisoner tried and convicted before
IT, Counsel also read from tho Congressional law rea
tive to the offence Of spies found lurking about United
States posts camps quarters, &C., elsewhere, punish
ment for which was death, and should be tried by o
military commission. The prisoner had been charged
with this offence. The order OF the President sum
Ia Dust his Honor OF all jurisdiction In the matter
Congress bad provided for such When military
prisoner was held BY authority Of the laws Of Congress
that moment the jurisdiction OF the civil ceased
The prisoner should be remanded, and the writ di .
missed.
Mr. Larocque desired more time to examine the issues
just presented. His Honor never had case for more
solemn elaborate jurisdiction. Counsel on the other
side had mistaken the form in which the matter had
been presented Two questions were h4fore them
First why, upon mere allegation Of detainer under
authority Of the President Of the United the court
there any satisfactory evidence nthc return as TO
an offence being committed by the prisoner: There
upon It's very face. II not enough that the simple
return should be produced, as ip that case General
No person on oath came and pointed 70 the prisoner as
being guilty Of an offence He would suppose that when
passed an act IN this matter %s. n: word s5
case, no man would have been safe in a time Of war.
Eherevef this prisoner travelled, whether in
Of the President charge The Inc prisoner with
Common sp sv or military a~' 's ad S mott confede
rate OF Kennedy And who was this Kennedy Was
that an order Of jursdctionf Would II be Of avail in
that nssnce' Even allowing the largest latitude
not II the President Of the United States issued an
order dcprving Of his liberty should not bear
upon its face the same jurisdiction In civil processS
There no jurisdiction shown for the arrest and i'm
prisonment OF Martin There specification Of any
charge whatever against him. The orders, upon their
face utterly null and void Counsel did not think 4
necessary to submit any authorities ON these points
Tic might stop there II he right in that presump
ton II decided both the questions. II dspos OF the
question Of the right TO try the prisoner before military
commission He (dr. Iarocque) thought that govern
ment officers had lost their during the late
war, in drawing distinction between civil and mill
tary law. Was our constitution TO be In force SIMPLY
while we had been waited upon the ocean
during summer breczes and be cast aside at the first
II intended to be the buwark Of the Amcri.
people, In well In peace. Except during
the last years such case had been heard Of
As armies advanced into enemy's country there
paliation for military despotsm and military commits.
HiOns
Judge Leonard remarked that the only material point
10 which iur sdction to be determined that in
relation TO spy.