he
war. He was a brother of Clarkson N. Potter, the prominent lawyer
and Democratic member of Congress later, and both were sons of the
Episcopal Bishop Potter of Pennsylvania. The character of the whole
court was very high for intelligence and standing. Before this court
Mr. Vallandigham was arraigned on the charge of publicly expressing
sympathy with those in arms against the government, and uttering
disloyal sentiments and opinions with intent to weaken the power of
the government in its efforts to suppress the rebellion.

Vallandigham consulted with the Hon. George E. Pugh and others as
his counsel, and then adopted the course of protesting against the
jurisdiction of the court and against the authority for his arrest.
His grounds were that he was not amenable to any military
jurisdiction, and that his public speech did not constitute an
offence known to the Constitution and laws. To avoid the appearance
of waiving the question of jurisdiction, his counsel did not appear,
though offered the opportunity to do so, and Mr. Vallandigham
cross-examined the witnesses himself, and called those who testified
for him. The question of fact raised by him was that he had not
advised forcible resistance to the government, but had urged action
at the elections by defeating the party in power at the polls. That
he did not in terms advocate insurrection was admitted by the judge
advocate of the court, but the commission were persuaded that the
effect of his speech was intended and well calculated to be
incendiary, and to arouse any kind of outbreak in sympathy with the
armed enemies of the country. The trial ended on the 7th of May, but
the judgment was not promulgated till the 16th, proceedings in
_habeas corpus_ having intervened. The finding of the court was that
the prisoner was guilty, as charged, and the sentence was close
confinement in Fort Warren, Boston harbor, during the continuance of
the war.

On the 9th of May Mr. Pugh made application to the United States
Circuit Court, Judge Leavitt sitting, for a writ of _habeas corpus_
directed to General Burnside, in order that the lawfulness of Mr.
Vallandigham's arrest and trial might be tested. The court directed
notice of the application to be given to the general, and set the
11th for the hearing. The case was elaborately argued by Mr. Pugh
for the prisoner, and by Mr. Aaron F. Perry and the District
Attorney Flamen Ball for General Burnside. The hearing occupied
several