Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1865-09-16
.'wnY vI.z's COUNSEL pr,K.rrp ulx.


The Washington Law firm which volunteered
its services to defend Wirz. and which to-day de
serted him, is said to have been losing business
IN consequence Of its connection with this case
Clients said they would have no objections if It
had simply.confned Itself to the well understood
duty Of defending a helpless prisoner when called
upon to do so, but il made haste 10 volunteer 10
the case, and was thought to have thus made an
unnecessary display OF sympathy With the ac-
eused ="
A similar version of the affair to the above.
perhaps the very same dispatch, was published.
! an told, in the indianapolis Journal.
Averse as l am to going into print about a
matter which ought, on the fscts of the case,
truly reported, to require no explanation, arn
unwilling TO permit the gross falsehoods con
tanned in the above dispatches to go uncorrected.
and therefore beg leave to submit 10 the public,
through your paper, the statement prepared by
me on the 25th Of August, without alteration or
addition. The assertion that either myself or
partners volunteered in the case, is a sheer in
vention, made to give point to the other equally
false assertion, that we were influenced by the
loss of clients to abandon the accused Both
these allegations will appear al once false and
absurd, 10 those acquainted with the extent and
character of our business, which renders it impos
sible for Us 10 participate in protracted crimi-
nal trial for ordinary compensation without grea,
loss. Indeed, when consented upon the
repeated application of WiTz, to defend him, il
was expressly stipulated that he was not to re.
quire any service OF me beyond what | could
render occasionally in aid of Mr.. Peck, who was
to have the case principally in charge 1t was
the newspaper clamor against him that impell ed
Us, being once engaged, to devote all our time to
bis defense, at great pecuniary sacrifice, and We
should have persisted TO the end before any indie
firth mil Dtr
could have had FAIR PLAY
The pretended loss of clients, referred to bv the
Gazette's report, has this much truth in il, and
no more. young lawyer in Washington had
put the papers of one OF his clients in our hands
TO bring suit upon in the Court of Claims We
accepted the employ n ent, directing him to write
TO his client and require the payment of a retain
ing fee. The party himself was a stranger to US
de wrote TO the young gentleman referred to,
declining to sanction what he had done, alleging
as reason that We we're defending Wirz
lee was the real reason, is question We had ne
means Of solving.
His letter was presented TO me tor the frs,
time some hours after had icifhdrarn from the
case. but icas submitted 10 the judge Allocate OF
the Commission befoTe IL pas sh0pn TO me- q signi-
hcaut fact TO indicatewb 90 may have prompted the
reporter of the Gazette. Without further prefac,
refer the public TO the following statement, pre-
pared Immediately after the transactions of which
II speaks, and in conclusion | will say, that
l have no purpose OF pursuing newspaper
controversies on the subject. 1t was e1-
ceedngly unjust in the Cincinnati Gazette 10
give currency to an atrocious libel upon my pro
fesSional character and motives, and those OF my
partners This has constrained me 10 20 into
print against my inclination j. Il.
To the Editor Offhe New York Times
Believing that public exposition of the res
sons which compelled me TO Withdraw from the
sham trial of Henry Wirz, before the Military
Commission organized second time for his de
struction, concerns the administration OF ius
tice, in which the whole people are interes-
ted, request you TO publish this communica-
ton.
Having assumed q professional relation TO the
accused, in the ordinary course eff business, upon
his written application from prison, where was
not permitted al the time TO confer with him as
counsel and with very little kno Wedge of the mer-
its of his case, should certainly have remained
with him to the close of his trial in any court Of
law, and rendered all the assistance in nv power
to save him from al illegal or unjust conviction
beyond that the duty of counsel does not ex
tend.
Nor would have Withdrawn from bis defense
after once entering upon il, before the e1traor-
binary tribunal now tantalizing him with its
hollow mockery of judicial proceedings, from
any disgust or personal consideration whatever
so long as believed my services available 10
securing him fair trial. But when thoroughly
convinced that my presence and assistance could
not benefit him in the least degree, felt il to be
not only right, but a duty, to retire from
theater where self-respect and professional indie
pendencs we're hard to maintain, and thus mark
by the most emphStic protest OF which | was
capable, my defamation of an outrage against
public justice, never exceeded IN a civilized coun
try. allude 10 the direct interpositien of mill
tsry authority TO dissolve the Commission and
unbind the solemn oaths of'its members TO try an
Issue joined; followed by it's immediate recon
structon to put in jeopardy second time, in
violation OF the Constitution the forlorn and
hapless victim Of its arbitrary power
Owing no further duty TO him in that place, be-
cause powerless to serve him there, thought
that while asserting the honor and dignity of my
profession, by leaving out the part OF advocate
from the elaborate farce, which 10 to usher In g
tragedy, to stain forever the administration of
American Justice, | might attract the attention
OF the public TO The iniquitous character of the
proceedings.
When . Court-martiAl is once organized, and
has entered on the trial of cause. il cannot be
interfered with or dictated TO by the authority
conveniDg it. de HART
The English author. Tyler. says: with the
appointment or constitution of the Court uartal
the ROYAL authority ceases till that Court shall
have pronounced it's iudgmsst. The king can
no more interfere with the procedure of Courts
martial in the execution of their duty, than be
can with that Of any OF the fixed Courts of JUS
tce 8" Up $50
But Wrz is being tried by Military Com
mission, not s~Aourt Martial. Very true bat
the utmost claimed for Military Commissions is,
that they are Necessary 70 try class OF ofenses
not eognizible by Courts Martial. because the
ofeDses triable by the latter are defined and
enumerated by law. and DO not embrace certain
crimes which ought to be punished by military
courts. IL hss always been conceded that as to
then mode Of procedure, rules Of evidence. re
cord, &c, they should GssinilAts as nearly as
practicable TO courts martial This is the first
IN which the authority eonvening the Commission
has stepped IN to control proceedings in the pro
gress Of q triai.-
| did not withdraw from the defense Oh sc
count of nv opinions to the legality OF Mil
sary COMMISSIONS, or their eIpediency al this
time.
withdrew because l believed the prisoner
could not obtain fair trial and | could not secure