Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-01-12
The Stevenson Cotton Cnse

The New York Times of The Sth pub.
iIsheS the following in regard TO the case
OF the United States vs.. V. X. Stevenson.
IN the United States District Court:
In this case Assistant District Atlornev
Phelps stated that since the Adjournment
the preceding afternoon. the government
had concluded to withdraw the motion IN
amend The Information. and would now
proceed with the trial on the original in
formation.
Assistant District Attorney Simmons
opened the case on the part of the govern
ment and stated that the information on
which the action was based was filed on
the list day of February, 1867, against GER
tain property claimed by the government.
consisting OF 1900 bales of cotton valued
at 81 ,OO0,OOO alleged 10 have been wrong
fully taken possession of by the defendant
Stevenson. The government was required
to prove three things 10 order to secure
the forfeiture of the property. First. the
title TO the 5000 bales of cotton: second.
the conversion of the same by the defen-
dant, and third, the value Of the same
The title of the United States 10 the cot.
ton would depend upon acts committed by
the defendant during the late rebellion
against the authority of the United States.
IL would be necessary to refer 10 the sever
al laws passed by Congress during the war.
prohibiting commercial intercourse with
the rebellious States.
Mr., Simmons reviewed the numerous
Treasury regulations made during the
war with respect to commercial transac-
lions with the South, the proclamatiOns of
the President and acts of Congress includ.
ing the COntiscation act of 1861. The
government alleges that large portion Of
the cotton in question was run through
the blockade in utter violation of all the
laws then in existence, which alone would
subject the property to forfeiture. II is also |
alleged that the defendant, at the time of |
the conversion Of the cotton, was an officer |
under the sO-called Confederate States. he |
having been commissioned as Major in the
Confederate army. and he was thereafter,
until the close Of the war, engaged in buy
ing cotton in the Southern States with the
express purpose Of running through the |
blockade 20 New York and Boston, and
receiving premium from the Confederate
government for each one hundred bales
struggled.
Assistant District Attorney Phelps then
offered in evidence the deposition of |
Francis A. Gaines, taken in Nashville,
Tenn, March 5, 1868, before commission |
issued from this district.
Mr.. Seward, counsel for defence, stated
that he was aware Of all the contents in |
the deposition, and in Justice to the defen- |
danL he would have 10 object to all The |
questions asked and answered therein, and, |
in order to save time, be proposed 10 make |
a general objection To everything in the /
deposition, on the ground that non. of |
the evidence given by the depOnent prov,s /
or tends 10 prove the right or title Of the /
government TO the property, and that ii |
fails to prove the acts alleged to have been
committed by the defendant during the i
summer of 1865.
The court refused TO take the objections
as counsel desired, as there we're many
questions in the deposition that could not
be objected to, and "a the counsel must
make his objections to each separ ate qnes-
ton as it came up.
The deposition was then read, and was
in substance as follows: DepOnent was the
Treasurer of the Nashville and Chatta-
nooga Railroad Company, and of which
Stevenson was President, and had known
of Stevenson receiving commissions from
the Confederate States Government.
Other depositions, tending to prove lbe
acts alleged to have been committed by
Stevenson were read, and at 8 P. n. the
case was adjourned to III A. NJ. to-day.