Year: 1865


that is probably the reason that no intilna.
ton was ever given TO me Of any Of these
purposes, and on the day which IL said to
have been fixed for this uprising, the 10th
of August, j left Dayton and went 10 Syra.
cuse, n. y, and on the 18th addressed a
a Democratic State Convention held in that
place, returning home on the 18th or Goth
When ! first heard Of the arrest in India
napolis for bringing in arms, ] was not
aware that there was any other charge /
supposed it was merely some arms that ind.
viduals had been bringing that subject had
been spoken of by some members Of the
organization in August, and had rcsolutc.
ly and detcrininedly opposed any thing like
the arming Of the organization. | never
heard of any money received by any member
of the organization, except--and this was
only reported to me-six thousand dollars.
which was collected from members Of the
organization in the State of Illinois. in the
fall Of 1863 and Ga. These were all the
funds | ever knew belonging to the organi-
zation, or given to any member OF it for any
purpose; and the question was suggested
whether arms were to be bought; my an.
swer was no; if any body desires TO arm let
him arm himself, if he thinks it necessary
for his safety and protection, but not with
money raised by contribution and that
though it might be abstracty lawful to arm,
1t would bear the appearance of an unlawful
purpose, and 1t ought not to be done that
there was no occasion for having arms that
the contingency in which alone it would be
proper to resort to the use of arms, was re-
mote-thc election being in November-and
contingent upon the attempt to suppress
that election, and prevent its being held
that was the only contingency in which
contemplated the use Of arms at ALL Wheth-
er right or wrong, must be determined here
after.


@. Was that the only contingency con.
templated by the order?


A. 1t was merely the expression of my
own opinions, as the chief officer of the
order.


@. When did you make this statement :!


A. The times and occasions were sever
al during the conversation in Windsor. on
the 18th Of April, | made the declaration
at other times when returned home; and
on every occasion when the subject was al
uded to that was the policy recommended
and enjoined


q. Did the order have in view, or take
any action in reference to the release of Con-
federate prisoners in Chicago?


A. never did, and | never heard until
the development of this trial that any at
tempt was being made in Chicago at the time
of the convention. When L did hear it
was as much surprised as any one though
| had heard that large body of troops had
been sent to Chicago during that convention,
and that there were some apprehensions that
1t was intended to prevent the convention
being held. L thought it was from pruden-
1nl Gal
of people there and had no idea that that
was to be made the occasion of an attempt
to release the Confederate prisoners.


q. Did this order have in view, as one
of its purposes, to render aid and afford pro
lection to escaped rebel prisoners of war?
A. never heard Of it in that connection
nor did | ever hear Of any member of tn,
organization make any statement of tha
kind the purpose of the order was to dis
connect itself utterly from every thing of tha
kind.


Q. Was it any purpose or object of the
order to furnish arms, soldiers, or supplies
to the Southern Contederacy?


A. 1t was not.


G. State if this order had for one of its
objects the establishment of North western
Contedcracy.


A. never heard the subject of a North
western Contederacy mentioned in connec-
ton with this organization until yesterday
in conversation with Judge BARLEY. My
own opinions as to a Northwestern Con-
tedcracy were expressed in Congress ; ifthey
are considered pertinent to this matter, they
are easily accessible.


q. Was it one of the objects or purposes
ofthis order to instigate, or get up an insur-
rection Of the people of the North western
States?


\. 1t was no part of its purposes; the
only contingency contemplated, as far as my
knowledge extends, was in the event of an
attempt to suppress the State or Presiden-
tal election, absolute suppression, by force
Of arms, and the reason was, that under our
system of government, we had provided for
peaceabe mode of revolution through the
ballot-box, and distinctly said, on various
occasions in conversation and instructions
to officers of this order


Testimony objected to by the Judge Ad-
vocate, as not responsive to any proof intro
duced on the part of the Government
Judge BARLEY submitted that it was COM
petent testimony, as it had been shown that
the action of the Supreme Commander was
tons the order was bound to obey
iHc cuuSo Ehu'ocdtc tHcll NltllurcW uls
objections.


@. With respect to the instructions and
directions which you gave to those members
of the order, ask for those which you gave
as Supreme Commander Of the order, in OIL
out of the order.


A. | never issued any order in writing a
! ALL or any formal order to be promulgated
but instructions, orally, to officers Of tn,
order and on the occasion when number
of officers of the order were present, il
April, that very question was considered
and there defined the position that the
true rule was, (what was suggesting whel
interrupted, that inasmuch as we had {
peaceable mode Of revolution, it was better
to acquiesce in arbitrary arrests, the con
templated suppression Of the liberty of the
press, and all else that has been complained
ofby the Democratic party, rather than re-
sist forcibly, until it came to the destruction
of that mode Of peaceable revolution, and
then believed that the contingency would
have arrived for resort to arms that would
be matter Of defense Of the exercise of the
right of suffrage.


Q. Did this order contemplate, as one oil
its purposes, resistance to the authority OF
the Federal Government?


a. 1t did not, except in that contingency
to which | have referred, the contingency
ofdefending the rights of elective franchise.
O. Had you any knowledge that any
lodge, or portion of this order eontemplates