The Cleveland leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1865-1865, 1865-06-28
Associated Press ReD0rt.
THE CnnsPIRACY TRIAL.
WASHINGTON, June 81.

Sanford Oonver, alias Wallace was re-
called by the Government and testified
that after he left Washington, which was
on the same day that he arrived h-re, he
yi.iled Montreal; met Sanders, Tucker,
Carroll, Rollin Wesco!t and q number Of
others; did not know at the time that the
witness had been before this commission, and
thert IRE receiv, him with great cor
diality. Tucker, while speaking of the trial,
denounced Seward and Lincoln ssscoudrels
and Judge Holt as blood thirsty old viii
lain, and added thst they should protect
themselves, for the eternal day of reckon
ing would coma, and a hesvy account
would have to be settled. Subsequently,
when it became known that the witness
had testified here his life was mensced,
and on several occasions pistols were
drawn, and threats made TO shoot him if
he did not swear 10 subscribe TO on stids
Wit TO the eff. ct that he hsd net testified
before the Commission, and that the Como
yer representing him, had testified to It's
sue OF falsehoO1s. This, tho witness re-
pested, was sworn to by him under duress
with pistols presented in his face. He did
il to save his life.
"a HlI0G=H uhul9u hAENOA NgAAODNAeAhON
the above tes stimony in part.
John COnley and W. d. Graves, print
ers from Selma, Ala, testified TO the hand
writing of G. Gale, of Cshawbs, who had
procured the publication OF an advertise
ment in the Selma Dispatch, advertising
for one million of dollars in order to pro
cure the death of Lincoln, johnson and
Seward.
Judge Advocate Holt said all the testi-
mony Tor tho Government was not in.
Assistant Judge Advocate Binghamtben
read an elaborate Argument, IN reply to
that of Reverdy johnson, on the jurisdic
tion of the Court. Mr.. Bingham shows
that the proclamation issued By. President
Lincoln, authorizing the trial OF insurgents
and their siders and sbettors by courts
martial and military commissions had been
ratified by acts of Congress, and slso that
the Supreme Court had decided that the
ratification by Congress was unnecessary.
The argument of Mr.. Bingham, special
Judge Advocate, in reply to several argu-
ments in defense of Mary 4. Surrstt and
others, contains the following points:
The rebellion, in aid of which this con-
spiracy was formed, and this great public
crime committed, was prosecuted for the
vindicalion of mo right, the redress OF
no wrong, but was itself simply criminal
conspiracy and gigantic assassination.
The court had already overruled the plea
of the jurisdiction he would pass it over
in silence, but for the fact tina. it had been
gravely argued by the counsel for the
accused denying the authority Of the Pre-
sident to constitute this commission, is an
that this tribunal is not a
court of Justice, has no legal eKpedience
and no power 10 hear and determine the
issue in making the averment. The coun-
sci showed how the President could have
otherwise discharged the duty epj0ined
upon him by his osth to protect persons
and defend the constitution, and take care
thai the laws bs faithfully executed. As
TO the assertion that the civil courts are
open in this district he answered that they
are closed throughout half the Republic,
and open in this district only by the force
Of the bayonet. Withdraw the military
force. and would the rebel bands intesting
the vicinity allow their confederates 10 be
tried in this or any other court2 The con-
spirstor who sssassinsted the President
was not arrested by civil process, but was
pursued by the military power, captured
and slsin. Was this an act Of usurpation
Who in all this land is bold enough or
base enough to assert It2 If tho President
is justified in this act, what law condemns
him for srresting in like manner, and sub
iecting to trial under military law all other
parties TO this conspiracy
The Judge Advocate argued that the
Court having been constituted BY the
President of he United States, it was not
in their power as interiors to disobey or
declare the act 8 military usurpstion.
Besides, the Supreme Court had decided
that the acceptation of the judicis officers
is q recognition Of the authority from
which it is derived. The proposition was
absurd. The gentlemen might as well ask
the Supreua Gnurt IN decide. The Presi.
dent had no authority to nominate, and the
Senate no authority TO confirm, the judges
composing that Court.
The Judge Advocate proceeded at
length, in reply to the argument OF the
council, citing precedent and sustaining
the action of the Government he show
ed that all proclsmstions the President Is
sued, during the rebellion, for the sup
preston of the same, and among them one
providing for the trial of all rebels and In
surgents, their eiders or abettors, by court
martial or military commissions, were rstl
fed by Congress; also that the Supreme
Court had decided so much of these proc
lsmstions as provided for courts martial o.
military commissions, needed no rstifca
tions.
The Judge Advocate did not review tn
testimony.
After Judge Advocate Bingham had de
livered this argument the court adjourned
TO one o'clock, P. M, to morrow.