Question. Did I go voluntarily to you and propose my arrest, and where was I arrested?

Answer. He came voluntarily to me and asked me if I could not have him arrested. I cannot say of my own knowledge where he was arrested; but before leaving I said to him, "William, where will you be found in case I send some one to arrest you?" And he answered that he would be found at home. At the time alluded to Mr. Hearst appeared quite penitent and could not speak of the subject without tears. I was not aware, at the time, that he was in the neighborhood.

Question. Do you know my past reputation as a citizen? and if so what has it been?

Answer. I have known Mr. Hearst for a long time; his general reputation was good-a good neighbor and fast friend when he was attached to any person. In point of education, very limited; he seldom reads. I would state that the present position of Mr. Hearst before this court was brought about by my advice to him.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Was he at home or in such position in regard to U. S. forces that he could or would have been arrested whether you had written to Captain Dover or not?

Answer. If he had not followed my advice and gone home he could have avoided being arrested.

Question. Was he within the lines of the U. S forces at that time? Answer. Yes, sir.

There being no further questions to propose to witness the evidence he had given was read to him and he was dismissed.

JOHN TOMBS, a witness for defense, was duly sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. Are you acquainted with me?

Answer. Not personally.

Question. State your knowledge of my acts showing an intention to avail myself of the benefit of the amnesty provided by the ordinance of the Missouri State convention passed on 16th of October, 1861, before the time of my arrest.

Answer. On or about the 3d of November last the brother of the accused came to me and said that he and his brother had come home with the intention of staying at home. He requested me to go to see Colonel Lawson the next morning (Monday) and state to Lawson that they had come home with the intention of staying, and to ask his advice whether they had better deliver themselves up to him or to troops at Big River bridge. I went to Lawson next morning, and he said he would go with them up to the force at Pilot Knob, if they would go up there with him. He said that if they would deliver themselves up as prisoners of war he would take them up to Pilot Knob. He told me to go back and tell them to keep out of the road until he could go up with them, as he had to go to Saint Louis, and would not be able to go up with them for a few days. I came back about 1 or 2 o'clock same day and told George Hearst, brother of accused, the message Colonel Lawson sent, and to tell his brother to keep out of the way until he, Lawson, returned from Saint Louis, for the reason that the troops at Big River bridge would treat him very roughly if they took him. There was a sick child at George's house, so that he could not go down to his brother William's nouse until Wednesday morning, and in the meantime they came and took his brother. The brother of accused came back the same evening and told me that his brother William was taken. George Hearst delivered himself up to Colonel Lawson, took the oath of allegiance, and is now at home with a pass. Colonel Lawson belongs to U. S. forces.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the evidence he had given was read to him and he was dismissed.

WILLIAM BLACKWELL, a witness for the prosecution, recalled.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE: Question. Was Big River bridge the day before or some time previous to its being burned within the lines of the U. S. forces?

Answer. Yes; there were U. S. troops to the southward of bridge.

Evidence read to witness by judge-advocate and he was dismissed. The accused represented to the commission that an important witness in his behalf was not in the city of Saint Louis, but would be here in two days; and having satisfied the commission that the evidence expected from said witness was necessary for his proper defense the case was postponed to Monday, January 13, at 10 a. m.

The commission then adjourned to meet to-morrow, Saturday, January 11, at 10 a. m.

SAINT LOUIS, Mo., January 11, 1862–10 a. m. The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present.

The absence of Capt. T. W. Sweeny, Second Infantry, U. S. Army, on yesterday was due to the fact as stated by him that he presented himself to the sentinels on Gratiot street, the route usually taken by members of the commission to their office, for the purpose of proceeding to the said office and to the performance of his duties when he was stopped by the sentinels; and when he informed them that he was a member of the military commission they still refused to let him pass and he therefore turned back.

There being no business before the commission it adjourned to meet on Monday, January 13, 1862, at 10 a. m.

SAINT LOUIS, Mo., January 13, 1862—10 a. m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment, all the members present.

The accused, William Hearst, also present.

The proceedings of January 10 and 11 were read over to the commission by the judge advocate.

THOMAS E. MOTHERSHEAD, a witness for the defense, was duly

sworn.

By the ACCUSED:

Question. State your name, residence, and occupation.

Answer. Thomas E. Mothershead; live within eight miles of Hillsborough, western part of Jefferson County, Mo.; a farmer.

Question. Do you know me, and how long have you known me? Answer. We were boys raised together, and I am thirty-two years old. We lived within one and a half miles of each other until we were married.

Question. Have you any knowledge of my enlistment as a soldier in the army of Jeff. Thompson, and if so, when and where did the enlistment occur?

Answer. I have some knowledge of it. I was in Bloomfield, Stoddard County, Mo., and went down to the camp of Colonel Lowe's regiment, in Jeff. Thompson's 19 R R-SER II, VOL I

army, and there I saw William Hearst and several others whom I knew, and Hearst told me that he was going to enlist and asked me to go up with him. We went up together to the headquarters of Colonel Lowe, and there Colonel Lowe swore him in as a private soldier in my presence. I saw him after that several times in the company to which he belonged.

Question. State the reputation as a citizen I have hitherto enjoyed, and also any knowledge you may have of the influences brought to bear upon me to induce me to go into the rebellion.

Answer. He was a citizen of Jefferson County, a farmer, peaceable as any man you could pick out down there; reputation as good and honest as any man in the country. I have seen William Hearst there frequently in county; and there were some men in the home guards at De Soto who did not like Hearst, and would report that he (Hearst) had been drilling there for the purpose of whipping the home guard, and through their influence and action he became satisfied that his life was in danger if he stayed there. He thought so and so expressed himself to me. He told me that was the cause of his going down to the army, and he said after he got down there that if he thought the men of the home guard would not pester or molest him he would go back home and stay there, and would have nothing to do with Jeff. Thompson's army. We had frequent conversations on the subject before he left and he always expressed these sentiments. He was a man that would rather do anything else than leave home; always talked in that way-that is, that he would not leave home unless afeared of persecution by some men of the home guard. One of these men was a cousin of Hearst's, and had been hired by him as a farm hand, and he would not work unless William Hearst was with him, and William discharged him, and he consequently became an enemy.

Question. Were you in Jefferson County at the time the bridge over Big River was burned?

Answer. No, sir; I was not.

Question. Have you any knowledge of the fight at Big River bridge or at Blackwell Station on or about October 16, 1861, and whether the burning of said bridge by Jeff. Thompson and his men was necessary to effect their escape or not?

Answer. I have no knowledge of the fight or of the burning of the bridge except from hearsay.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Do you know the names of the officers in command or the name of the regiment in which the accused enlisted at Bloomfield?

Answer. I know some of them. The captain's name was White, and the first lieutenant's name was Whittaker Martin. It was a cavalry company attached to Colonel Lowe's regiment, under Jeff. Thompson.

Question. What was the date of the enlistment of the accused?
Answer. I think it was between the middle and the last of September, 1861.

Question. You say that the accused, William Hearst, had been reported by some men of the home guard at De Soto as drilling men to whip the home guard; do you know whether this accusation was true or false?

Answer. It was false to my personal knowledge. I know he never did; he could not do it.

There being no further questions to propose to the witness the evidence he had given was read to him by the judge-advocate and the witness dismissed.

The examination by the defense was here closed. The accused then presented his written defense, appended to these proceedings and marked A, which was read to the commission by the judge-advocate.

The commission was then cleared for deliberation, and having maturely weighed and considered the evidence adduced find the accused, William Hearst, of Jefferson County, Mo., as follows:

Of the specification, guilty.

Of the charge, guilty.

And the commission does therefore sentence the said William Hearst, of Jefferson County, Mo., to be shot to death.

S. D. STURGIS, Brigadier-General, U. S. Army. RICH'D D. CUTTS,

Colonel, U. S. Army, and Judge-Advocate.

The commission then adjourned to meet to-morrow, Tuesday, January 14, 1862, at 10 a. m.

The commission having thus performed the painful duty of awarding punishment in conformity to the laws of war and to General Orders, No. 32, 1861, which deprived them of all discretionary power, beg leave to recommend the case of William Hearst to the merciful consideration of the confirming authority.

The members of the commission engaged in the trial have reason to believe that the prisoner is an unusually stupid and ignorant man, and not capable of discriminating between the lawful commands of a superior officer and those that are criminal; that he enlisted in the rebel ranks more from unfounded fear of his neighbors than from any deepseated feeling of disloyalty, and that he voluntarily delivered himself up as a prisoner when he could have escaped arrest.

S. D. STURGIS,

Brigadier-General, U. S. Army.
RICH'D D. CUTTS,

Colonel, U. S. Army, and Judge-Advocate.
JOHN SCOTT,

Lieutenant-Colonel Third Iowa Infantry.
E. W. CHAMBERLAIN,

EXHIBIT A.

Major First Iowa Cavalry.

Being illiterate I was made the dupe of bad men who have hitherto borne such a good name in my neighborhood that I was led to place confidence in them. I never entertained a thought of overthrowing the Government, but went to Thompson's army through fear of Federal troops whom I was induced to believe were coming upon me and my neighbors with fire and the sword to commit an indiscriminate slaughter. I was told and believed that the Federal troops were usurping authority and destroying the guarantees of the Constitution. Thus misled I went to Jeff. Thompson's rebel army, who I believed were fighting for the Constitution against usurpation of the President. The evidence shows that I there enlisted in a company organized as I understood by authority of the laws of the State of Missouri. Being regularly mustered into the said army I became subject to the orders of the officers of the company and battalion. We were ordered to march up to the Big River bridge. We were told that the destruction of that bridge was a military necessity, and were ordered by our officers under the penalties inflicted by military law for disobedience of orders to destroy the bridge. I felt it was wrong at the time, and hesitated. The bridge was fired by others not by myself. The statements of the

witness Wilson are untrue. He was present at the burning of the bridge and was as active as any of the men of Thompson, and as much rejoiced at our success. A confrere and associate of the leading secessionists in Jefferson County before that time, his hesitancy and refusal to answer as to his membership of the order of Knights of the Golden Circle must be satisfactory to the court of his complicity with the schemes of the rebellion and the wicked purposes of his statements. The evidence shows how I returned to my home as soon as I found that I could do so and as soon as it was shown to my understanding how greatly I had been duped.

The proof shows that I returned and offered to comply with the provisions of the ordinance of the Missouri State convention to obtain the amnesty there offered. This I was prevented from doing by my arrest and imprisonment. I did hesitate to go voluntarily and surrender myself; I knew the fearful punishment which the members of the order of the Knights of the Golden Circle were sworn to visit upon a deserter from the rebel army and I therefore requested Mr. Bates and sent for Colonel Lawson to send and have me arrested.

I

In good faith I laid down my arins, relying upon the amnesty promised by the convention and which I am informed the President of the United States has recognized and agreed to respect. I have been humbugged into the folly and crime of rebellion. I saw the deception practiced upon me, and felt the folly and crime I had been guilty of. sought to return to my allegiance. I was assured of safety in so doing. I would not have been taken had I not desired it. The proof shows this. My hands bear no stains of blood. I was never in a battle. All that I did was in a regular manner of regular warfare. If I am not permitted to return to my allegiance under the provisions of the ordinance of the convention I am still entitled to the treatment of a prisoner of war. This I do not desire as I do not wish to be exchanged. I submit my fate to this commission. If the punishment I have endured be not sufficient for unintentional crime I have been guilty of toward my country I am willing to endure more. What I may not ask of the justice of the commission I may entreat of its mercy that I may be permitted to return to my allegiance my home and my family, and by future loyalty and devotion to the Constitution and Union of the United States endeavor to atone for the error of the past.

WILLIAM HEARST.

The finding and sentence are approved; but in consideration of the recommendation of the members of the commission, on account of the general ignorance and stupidity of the prisoner the sentence is mitigated to confinement in the military prison during the war. H. W. HALLECK, Major-General.

Trial of Col. Ebenezer Magoffin, accused of murder and violation of

parole.

SAINT LOUIS, Mo., February 6, 1862-10 a. m.

The commission* met pursuant to adjournment

Present as follows: Brig. Gen. David S. Stanley, U. S. Army; Col. R. D. Cutts, of the staff; Lieut. Col. John Scott, Third Iowa Volun. teers.

Constituted by Special Orders, No. 81, p. 284. Brig. Gen. D. S. Stanley, U. S. Army, relieved Brig. Gen. S. D. Sturgis, U. S. Army, on this commission in pursuance of Special Orders, No. 59, January 20, 1862, omitted.