them to a room assigned to them; whence they were called separately, and examined, as follows:

The first witness, having been sworn upon the Bible to speak, without hate or fear, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and declaring that he was neither relative, connection, nor servant of either party, answered thus: My name is Miranda Pierre, 47 years of age, second mate of the bark William, and I live at Bordeaux.

(The testimony of this witness conformed in every particular to the charges of the indictment, as far as regards the voyage of the William from Port-auPrince, touching at Grand Inagua, Cape Haytien, &c., with all the crew employed by Pelletier to capture our people and seize the Geffrard.)

Interrogated by the judge, at the request of the prosecutor, he declared, that when the accused drew up the report he requested him to sign any name to it, and he signed his real name.

Mr. Linstant wishing to propose an irrelevant question to the witness, (incriminating himself,) the court objected to or overruled his request, whereupon Mr. Linstant threw up his case and withdrew.

Witness being examined by the civil party, stated the color of the pilot and his son, taken from the Caciques; they were black, and had gone ashore voluntarily; but Pelletier spoke to them in English, which witness does not understand. The accused, Ursin Castaign, was asked what oaths Pelletier made use of in speaking of Hayti. He answered: "The damned country! I'll get paid yet!"

Thomas Collar, by interpreter, was asked how much provisions and water the bark William had on board-enough for the voyage from Port-au-Prince to New Orleans? Under what flag he sailed from Port-au-Prince, and under what did he touch at Fort Liberté and Cape Haytien? Answer: Four barrels of pork, four of beef, eight pipes of water, and many empty casks; does not know if there were other provisions aboard, but thinks there were not more than enough for the voyage from Port-au-Prince to New Orleans. The bark left Port-au-Prince under American colors, and hoisted the French flag in the ports of Fort Liberté and Cape Haytien.

The same questions were put to the other witnesses, separately, and they said there were other provisions on board, and more than enough for the voyage from Port-au-Prince to New Orleans. Their answer to the flag question was: The bark had left Port-au-Prince under American colors, and hoisted the French flag near the cape, to call a pilot, and had saluted a passing vessel with the same flag, and only at Fort Liberté did he hoist the French flag permanently, taking down the ship's ensign having" William" printed on it, and substituting a flag with "William Tell, of Havre," written on it. The captain also changed his name and ordered the crew to call him "Mr. Jules Lettellier."

The accused, Picault Louis, adds that Captain Pelletier ordered Miranda to give him 48 lashes, but Miranda had too much humanity to execute the order. He estimates the number of water-casks at more than one hundred, and proves it by saying he saw Pelletier buy 94 casks, of 30 and 60 gallons, before leaving Port-au-Prince. He says Pelletier struck him, and the prisoner Thibodeaux attests his bad treatment of the crew. He mentions his attempt to escape with Maurice, Picault, and Guilloux, and how Miranda's vigilance prevented them. They made more than one attempt, but always failed. He mentions the great fear of the crew for the captain and his wife, a terrible woman; in fact, the sailors were afraid of each other.

The accused, Guilloux, says the captain nearly killed him with cruelty and lashings, and treated several others with the same severity. Being cross-questioned, he said, when asked about his business as carpenter on board, that he made a platform, but had never seen one on a merchant vessel before.

All the crew agreed on the particulars of the impromptu ball the captain gave

on board, while in the harbor of Fort Liberté, and his intention to carry off the young men and women who were invited.

After the examination of each witness the judge asked Pelletier if he had any defence to make, and he persisted in his resolution to make no defence, nor accept counsel.

Miranda's examination is now continued and explained to Collar by the interpreter. The judge asked him if the prisoners present were the persons meant. He said Pelletier was the only one guilty; the others were on board and were treated as bad as himself. The judge asked Pelletier if it was true, and he made no answer. All the others said it was.

The second witness was brought in: he was sworn; said he knew Collar and Pelletier; was steward on the brig William, in command of Captain Pelletier, now present; said his name was Theodore Mary Cheignon, age 31, a cook by trade; lives in Port-au-Prince. He was asked if he knew Cotis and Caño; when he shipped on the William; what was the cargo; if the captain had not taken a pilot and cabin boy at Cartagena; what was their color, and what the captain did with them. He replied: I shipped at New Orleans for Rio Hacha, by Mr. Deloney's advice; the captain did not go there, but sailed direct to Great Caïman island, where he landed Bayna, a passenger, and his family; he knew neither Cotis nor Caño, but the stranger landed might be Cotis; there was tobacco, corn, and meats on board, but he did not know to whom they belonged; had seen Pelletier receive $600, which he said was for goods; the captain had taken a cabin boy and pilot, both colored, at Cartagena, and left them in Port-au-Prince.

Pelletier made no reply put to him by the judge. The prosecuting attorney requested the judge to have Pelletier committed for contempt of court. The judge did not order him to jail.

Being six o'clock, the court was adjourned till 8 o'clock next morning, the 28th day of the month.

The minutes were then read and signed by the judges and the clerk.

The court opened next morning, according to adjournment, and the trial proceeded. The third witness was introduced and sworn: said he knew only Pelletier and Urbain Castaign; his name was Nepomucene Gaëtan Cesvest, age 32, commission merchant, residing in Port-au-Prince. The vessel was consigned to this witness. After his examination the judge asked the prisoners if what he said was true. Castaign answered in the affirmative, but Pelletier made

no answer.

The fourth witness was introduced and sworn: said he knew the prisoners; his name was Vil Maximilien, age 32 years; resides in Port-au-Prince; Pelletier applied to him for 50 men and 6 women to dig guano, but he said they could not be shipped without a government permit; Pelletier told him he had a permit, but it turned out that he had only mentioned it to Colonel A. Celcis, the port warden. All the accused confessed the truth of this testimony, but Pelletier refused to answer any questions.

The fifth witness was introduced and sworn: said he knew two of the accused, Pelletier and Castaign, for he had seen them in New Orleans, and they had been at his house in Mobile. He also knew Mr. Cotis, a passenger in the William. His own name was Henry Tyrelle, 20 years of age; no trade; lives in Mobile, United States. He was asked if Pelletier did not quit Port-au-Prince with the American flag up, and then hoist French colors at Fort Liberty and Cape Haytien. He answered in the affirmative. He was asked if Urbain did not tell him to use all his influence to dissuade Pelletier from his intended slave trade and his ball. He answered yes, he did all he could, and had long sus pected Pelletier. The prisoners were then asked if the witness spoke the truth. Castaign said yes, but Pelletier refused to answer.

The sixth witness was introduced and sworn: he knows Pelletier and Urbain,

Mr. Cotis and Caño; his name is Jean Felix Laconture, age 64 years; ship captain and merchant; lives in Port-au-Prince.

Mr. St. Amand here interrupted the counsel by saying this witness was only introduced to explain the route Pelletier took from New Orleans to Cartagera, Kio Hacha, and the other ports mentioned in the log-book, upon a map to be laid before him. Mr. Clavier said this witness was too intimate with the accused to be a witness; any other sea captain would have been preferable. Mr. St. Amand consented to have any other, but Mr. Clavier withdrew his objection, and the witness was examined. He said Pelletier and Castaign were the persons he referred to. When they were asked if what the witness said was true, Castaign answered in the affirmative, but Pelletier made no response.

Seventh witness introduced and sworn. Name, Richoux Mary; age, 30; commission merchant in Port-au-Prince; knows Pelletier; is no relation to him. In speaking of Pelletier, the American consul, Mr. Lewis, said he was a bandit. Witness's name (the eighth witness) is Aristide Chassaing; age, 29; commands the despatch boat Geffrard, and resides in Port-au-Prince. Says he knows Pelletier; was introduced to him by a strange sea captain, and convoyed his vessel from Port-au-Prince to Cap-à-Four. He knows the other accused, Castaing, for Pelletier sent him on board the despatch boat to regulate the chronometers-the only time he ever saw him; is not related to either, nor interested in any way in this suit.

Theeighth witness, Picault Louis Benjamin; age, 30; lives in Port-au-Prince, and is employed in the custom-house there. His testimony was similar to that of the preceding.

The ninth witness, Antonio Lobos, was introduced and sworn. He only understande Spanish. Citizen Doucet was summoned to appear as interpreter for this witness. The court then adjourned till 2 p. m. The minutes were signed by the judges and clerk.

In the afternoon the court met according to adjournment, and proceeded to business. Citizen Doucet, the Spanish interpreter, not having arrived, the next witness, Mr. Wilson, was introduced and sworn. He answered: My name is William Wilson; I am 44 years of age, a merchant residing in Port-au-Prince ; he knew but one of the accused, whom he advised not to ship on the William ; he knows nothing about Pelletier, except that he bought 43 seroons of tobacco. from the house of Mary & Haltsmus, weighing 4,741 pounds, which they told him afterwards was part of the cargo of the William, Captain Pelletier's bark. Asked why he advised one of the accused not to ship on the William; he answered that he told the man if he shipped on the William for New Orleans, he would never reach his destination, but would most likely be brought back to Port-au-Prince. He told him this because the rumor of Pelletier's business was very rife at the time.

'The tenth witness being introduced and sworn, deposed as follows: Name, Adolphe Granier; age, 30 years; cook, living in Port-au-Prince; says he knows all the accused, and particularly Pelletier and the woman Henrietta, called Madam Pelletier; they stopped at his hotel. Is no way interested in this trial. He also knows the two gentlemen Cotis and Caño, who have lodged at his house ever since they came to the island. He knows nothing about the guilt of these persons; does not even know of what they are accused. He was asked by the judge if the witness Theodore did not say Pelletier was a thief, in his presence, before the Spanish consul, and that Pelletier had stolen merchandise belonging to Cotis and Caño, and had not swindled him out of a half barrel of wine.

presence,

Witness replied it was possible Theodore may have said that in his but he did not remember it; and it was true Pelletier sold him two half barrels of wine, and only delivered one after receiving the $60.

Mr. St. Amand requested the deposition of the Spanish consul to be taken,

to disprove the testimony of the present witness. The motion was overruled by the judge, and the examination was continued. The accused were here asked if what this witness had said was true, and they all answered yes.

The eleventh witness was now introduced and sworn by interpretation of Citizen Dorcet, who had also taken an oath to interpret faithfully the evidence of Antonio Lobos, who says he understands no language but Spanish. Name, Antonio Lobos; age, 23; sailor, living in Valparaiso, republic of Chili; says he knows Pelletier and wife, Urbain, Thomas Collar, Cotis, and Caño; is not related to any of them, and is no way interested in this suit. His oral testimony conformed in every particular with that of preceding wit nesses. He shipped on the William at Cartagena, and left the vessel on its arrival at Port au-Prince. Here Pelletier kept him in jail for 38 days, keeping all his clothes and retaining his wages at $18 a month. This witness, Antonio Lobos, said Pelletier's conduct was suspicious from the time he left Cartagena. and that was the reason he ran away at Port-au-Prince. Pelletier also suspected him, refused to let him go ashore at Port-au-Prince, and when he was caught in an attempt to escape, had him put in irons. This testimony being interpreted to the accused, they were asked if it were true, and all answered yes, except Pelletier, who made no reply.

The twelfth witness being called, it was found that he had heard the testimony of the others examined this day, and Mr. Clavier objected to his exami nation on that account, while Mr. St. Amand insists upon his examination.

The judge deciding he could be heard, he was forthwith sworn and examined. Name, Joseph Dupuy; age, 32 years; a cook, residing at Port-au-Prince; he is acquainted with all of the accused, is kin to none of them, and is not interested in this suit. Knows Cotis only from seeing him on board, and in the city afterwards. This witness confirms-all the accusations against Pelletier, particularly that concerning Mr. Cotis, stating all the particulars of the voyage from Cartagena to Port-au-Prince. He was then asked if the prisoners present were the persons he spoke of, and he answered yes. The accused were asked if what the witness said was true, and they all answered in the affirmative except Pelletier, who persisted in making no defence.

Considering the lateness of the hour, the court adjourned till eight o'clock next morning, the 29th day of the month. The minutes were signed by the judges and the clerk of the court, C. Chéri, B. A. Gillot, and D. Mege; J. M. Duvet, clerk.

On the morning of the 29th of August, 1861, at eight o'clock, the court opened according to adjournment, all parties being present, and the audience public. Before continuing the regular proceedings, the prosecuting attorney requested the judge to order the clerk to read aloud the depositions of the interrogatories of several sailors of the William, imprisoned by Pelletier, and absent from the city. The minutes were drawn up on board the William, at Fort Liberty, by Pelletier himself, signed by several persons, among them the mate, Miranda. It was signed by Pelletier with the fictitious name of Jules Letellier, commander of the bark William Tell, of Havre.

Baena's accusation of Pelletier was also read aloud to the court.

After this the weapons and ammunition found on board the vessel were shown to the witnesses, who confessed that they had been on board the William. They consisted of guns, revolvers, pistols, lefaucheux, fulminating, and common pow der, caps, bullets, cartridges, bayonets, knives, dirks, bullet moulds, handcuffs, flags of different nations, &c., &c. Several of the sailors said they not only recognized the manacles, but had felt them on their wrists, and Urbain Castaign said he was one of the men who delivered the arms to the authorities. Pelletier would answer no question put to him, still saying that he would make no defence.

The pleadings of the lawyers now began; each one made a statement of the

case in a short speech. While Mr. St. Amand was speaking, Pelletier broke his obstinate silence and said he would like to have the ship's register brought and shown to the jury, and all other papers they could find on board.

The speeches being ended, the judge asked the accused if they had anything to say in their defence. All answered "no," except Pelletier, who said he had no defence to make. Mr. Quiqueron made the concluding argument, and the judge announced the discussion over. He then charged the jury, and told them. they were to consider these questions, as follows:

1. Has piracy and the fraudulent abstraction of goods at sea or on Caïman island, to the injury of John Cotis and Antonio Caño, now in Port-au-Prince, been proved in this case?

2. Is Antonio Pelletier, the accused, guilty of these acts?

3. Are the prisoners Urbain Castaign, John Henry Brown, and Thomas Collar, guilty as accomplices?

4. Was the theft committed with force and violence-with attempt to kill? 5. Is the attempt at piracy and the slave trade, committed on the coast of Hayti, sufficiently proven?

6. Is Antonio Pelletier guilty as the author of these crimes?

7. Are these accused guilty as accomplices in these acts: namely, 1. Thomas Collar. 2. John Henry Brown. 3. Urbain Castaign. 4. Picault Louis Jean Baptiste Benjamin. 5. Millet Pierre Henry. 6. Alexandre Thibodeaux. 7. Cartier François. 8. Louis Maurice. 9. Rogard Yves Guilloux. 10. Jean Alexandre Herault. 11. Louis Legallin?

8. Has not these attempts at piracy and the slave trade failed more by accident than by the will of the accused and his accomplices?

The judge now announced that Pelletier might hereafter be tried for the crimes of forgery and rebellion, of which he was clearly guilty and certainly liable, as these counts were not in the present indictment.

He then read articles 275 and 276 of the criminal code to the jury, and handed over all the papers in the case, and gave a special order to the corporal of the guard from article 276, of the same code.

The jury then withdrew from the court room and retired to their apartment for deliberation.

The accused were taken back to jail.

The jury having agreed returned to the court room, and the foreman, rising, placed his hand upon his heart and said: Upon my honor and my conscience, before God and in the presence of man, the verdict of this jury is, in answer to the first question in regard to piracy and theft, Yes.

Answer to second question: Is Antonio Pelletier guilty of it? Yes.

3. Are Urbain Castaign, John Henry Brown, and Thomas Collar guilty as his accomplices in these acts? No.

Yes.

4. Was the theft committed by force and violence with intent to kill? 5. Is the attempt at piracy and slaving on the coast of Hayti proven? Yes. 6. Is Antonio Pelletier guilty of these last-mentioned acts? Yes.

7. Are the other accused guilty as his accomplices in this crime? Answer: The first three; John Henry Brown, Thomas Collar, and Urbain Castaign, Yes. The eight others, No.

S. These attempts at piracy and abduction, did they fail by accident or volition? By accident, Yes.

The above verdict, signed by the foreman of the jury in presence of his colleagues, was given to the judge, who signed it and gave it to the clerk, who appended his signature likewise. The jury was then discharged and the prisoners introduced. This verdict was then read to them by the clerk, and interpreted literally to those who did not understand French, by the sworn interpreter. The judge, then, in accordance with article 290 of the criminal code, read the verdict of the jury to those not guilty, and they were immediately set