H 
 
 SUPPLEMENTAL. 
 
 MEMORIAL 
 
 OF- 
 
 Arthur Rrnest Hatheway, 
 
 
 To his Excellency, l'^;"- 
 
 THE RT. HON. SIR FREDERIC A. STANLEY, 
 
 GOVERNOR GENERAL OF CANADA, 
 
 OTTAWA, CANADA. 
 
 I 
 
 
SUPPLEMENTAL. 
 
 MEMORIAL 
 
 OF 
 
 ARTHUR ERNEST HATHEWAY. 
 
 To his Excellency, 
 
 THE RT. HON. SIR FREDERIC A. STANLEY, 
 
 GOVERNOR GENERAL OF CANADA, 
 
 OTTAWA, CANADA. 
 
 Yrui ML'iiiorialist respectfully sliowetli as follows: lie was horii in the City of St. Jolm, 
 ill tlic Province of New IJriiiiswicU, Dominion of Canada, on the 7''' 'I'ly <'f Ji""-') ■'^- I^- 
 :.S63, and is now aiul lias always been a lav\ -ahidin^ and loyal suhject of the Goveniniciit of 
 (Jreat JJritain. 
 
 Heretofore on three separate occasions the fj^overnment has "graciously exteiidcHl its good 
 ollices in his behalf in an etlbrt to obtain from the government of the I 'nited States of America 
 just and fair compensation to him for and on account of his false and illegal iir.prisonment by 
 the military authorities of the said United States, in the Territory of Wyoming, from the 20th 
 day of February to the 23rd day of March, inclusive, A. D. 18S5 ; through the etlbrts of his 
 government three propositions for pajment have been made, one of $132.00, another of 
 $^00.00, and a third of $ic)CK).o(j, each of which has been refused by him because an inade- 
 (|iiate sum was olVered ; the latter oiler of $1000.00 was declined as per letter of his counsel, 
 Simon \V. Ilatheway, Es([., to The Hon. G. Powell, under secretary of state for the Domin- 
 ion of Canada, tlated March 22nd, 18S9. Vouchers prepared for the signature of Memo- 
 rialist were ibrwarded to him as he is intbrmed, but such vouchers never reached him, and 
 have never been signed by him, and he knows not where they are ; if the}' ever come into his 
 hands he will return them unsigned through the pioper channel. 
 
 He again humbly solicits tiie good oflices of his government and in support of his prayer 
 therefor submits this brief of facts alread> [nescnted and not denied by the government 'ot the 
 Uniteil States so far as he is informed, together with additional facts l)earing upon and aggra- 
 vating his claim for compensation, and al.so a brief of the law and precedent governing cases 
 like that of Memorialist. 
 
 The undisputed facts are, brielly stated, substantially as follows : 
 
 On the 20th of ^^ebruary, A. D. 18S5, he was engaged in tlie lawful business of general 
 iiierchaiulising in the town of liig Horn City, in the county of Johnson and Territory of Wy- 
 oming, ill the United States, where he had uniformly conducted himself as a quiet and law- 
 abiding commorant of the Unitetl States and of the said Territory. IJetween the hours of six 
 and one-half and seven aiul one-half o'clock in the evening of said day, while he chanced to 
 be in a public hotel in said place, he was seized by a body of United States soldiers, armed 
 with carbines, under the command of a sergeant, and told he would be shot if he attempted to 
 escape ; no warrant of arrest was produced or authority therefor, but he was given to under- 
 stand that his arrest was in pursuance of orders emanating from one Charles C. Compton, a 
 
 1 
 
Colonel of United States Cavalry, ami Cominaiulaiit of the Post of Ft. McKinney, Wy- 
 omiiif^ Territory ; he was told lie was a deserter from the United States Army, anil a horse- 
 thief; he stoutly denied the accusing statements of the military <j;uard, and truthfully and ac- 
 curately disclosed his identity and nationality ; hut notwithstanding his statements of his 
 iimocence and that he was a British suhjectju; was ironed hy being handculled, in the public 
 room, and permitted no bed that night i)ut a sofa ; a guard stood over him all night long with 
 his carbine in hand ; he was kept under guard substantially the same way during the 21st, 
 hut in the evening of the 21st the irons were removed from his wrists to his feet ; but he was still 
 denied abed and kept under guard ; on the morning of the 23nd of February, the irons were 
 removed and he was put into a wagon between two soldiers ami tlriven to a ranch on Pine 
 Creek where he was placed, still under guard, in an out-houso and there kept lill the 33rd, 
 when he was taken to l'\)rt McKinney, a distance of thirty miles from the town of Big Ilorn 
 City; on arriving at Fort McKinney, all his private papers, letters, money, and every thing 
 in his pockets but his tooth biush were taken from him by the United .States soldiers and be 
 was conlined in the cell marked A in the appended giinnul plan of the guard house of Fort 
 McKinney, which was the scene of his prolongetl coniinement. 
 
,s » 
 
 .5 ' 
 
 H ,!,»": |- 
 
 STOOP OF GUARD HOUSE. 
 
 FACING THE PARADE. 
 
 llooin of llic ScrRcanl 
 of Ihe Oiiaul. 
 
 S(nve. 
 
 Cliin I\nrk. 
 
 ClII " E." 
 
 fJarrisnii Prisoners. 
 
 ■|l:.> 
 
 1 
 
 Stove. 
 
 ■s> Water I'.iil 
 
 >| U<iru. L 
 
 J Win- I 
 
 r 
 
 Cell "A." 
 (IcniTiil Priscmer''. 
 
 t/3.5 
 
 U 3 
 
 I H-l hH H 
 
 I trior. I >oor. Do 
 
 4 \V,n- I 
 l.l.nv.f 
 
 
 lirinnl [inil Water Cliisi't. 
 
 w 
 
 B 
 
 — \n 
 
 (Juard House Yard, siirromidcd liy liiyh stockade. 
 
lie was su'ijectfd to tlic indif^nity of iin<lrcssin<r and exposing his person in a untie condi- 
 tion soon after arrivinj^at l'"ort McKiiniev before soldiers piesent. and later in the afternoon 
 was ordered to stand in a line with other prisoners and compelled to stand np with them ; the 
 name of A. ].l leath was called three times and he was ordered to answer ; he refused toanswer 
 and said" I'ani not I leath,liut II;ithevvay,an(l 1 will not answer toany name lint llatlieway." An 
 othcer tiien said •' That man in civilian's clothes step ont ;" he heinj; the only man in civilian 
 dress stepped ont,wiu'n he was reconducted to cell A (see plan) and an oilicial document was 
 presented to him whereon he found these words "Q. M. Department, Fort McKinney, Wy- 
 oming, A. J. Heath, Private, Co. K, 5th Cavalry; four blankets;" he told the ollicer, 
 whom he afterwards ascertained was one Capt. W'm. C. Forl)iish of the 5tli U. S. Cavalry, 
 that he could not sign that jiaper as his name was not Heath, whereupon lie was again or- 
 (icrc<l bv the othcer to sign the jiaper by the name of Healii, but he again refused ; he was 
 then told bv Capt. Forbush : " You may either sign that paper or freeze ; you will not get 
 " any blankets until yon sign the name of Heath." Capt. Forbush then ordered him to be 
 ))laced in solitary confmement ; he has since learned that this was done by order of Col. 
 Comjiton ; he was then taken to cell marked 1? (see ground plan appended) and locked up. 
 Tills cell is about three and one-half leet wide by about eigiit teet long, with stone floor ; side 
 and door of wood interlaced with strong iron bars: no opening for light and \entilalion, ex- 
 cept in the roof, which was of interlaced iron ; door soliil and cell devoid (jf furniture of any 
 kind ; cell also damp, very cold and so dark that he could not see to eat ; he was deprived of 
 bedding and co\cring, except his overcoat, which had not been taken from him ; the night 
 was verv cold anil sleep was impossiiile ; he was kept conlined in tiiis dark and dam]) cell 
 until the 26th, without blankets or bedding or w.'irmth. and in cell A from the 26th to the ist 
 day of March without blankets or bedding, but was a little better oil for vvarmtii ; during this 
 period he was subjected to frequent examinations ; Colonel Compton anil other olVicers were 
 repeatedly told he was not Heath. Once he was taken to a soUlier in the sick (juarters who 
 said ho tiiought he was ihc yottf/i^cr and taller of two Heaths and again a sergeant said he 
 thought he was the older and shorter of the two Heaths; he oilered to jiurchase blankets but 
 was ilenied tlie privilege ; he was denied the i)rivilege of going near the the to warm himself 
 from and after being conlined in cell B, and until March ist he was confined in cell A with a 
 cowfitV/" named Hughes. He was denied all communication except one interview with his 
 counsel, and except also the examinations by the soldiers ; he was denied pen and ink, 
 though allowed a pencil ; his letters were all inspected by the military. The continued 
 strain so ellected him .-uid he was so evidently sick on the ist of March that he was allowed 
 the liberty of the guard-iiousc ; on the loth of March he was allowed the jM'ivilege of the 
 garrison antl on the iSth of March was sent to the hospital; at nitie o'clock the same night 
 he was awakened and ordered to take his bed again to cell A and was conducted there by a 
 soldier with carbine in hand; on the 19th of March he was again sent to hospital where he 
 remained till March 21st, when he was again confined in the guard-house, this time in the 
 room of the sergeant of the guard, but he was allowed a stove and bedding; on March 22nd 
 he was paroled for the garrison and sul)se([uently returned to the hosj^ital ; on Alonday, 
 March 23rd, he was allowed the freedom of the garrison and between two and four o'clock 
 in the afternoon Col. Cfimpton told him he might leave Fort McKiiniey. 
 
 .iVdditional facts bearing upon and aggra\ating his claim for compensation are in brief as 
 follows, as will moie fully appear by sworn statements appended hereto antl made a part 
 hereof: It is shown by the afVuIavit of Claimant marked Exhibit J, that during the time he 
 was confined without fire or blankets, bedtling or furniture of any kind in the cell marked J) 
 on the plan of the prison heretofore submitted in this case and made a part thereof", between 
 the 23rd and 26th of February A. D. 1SS5, after he had been ordered into solitary confine- 
 uient, having refused to sign the name of Heath at the refpiest of one Capt. I'orbush, ;md after 
 having been told by said ollicer he might fVec/.e if he would not so sign, and tiiat he could not 
 have any blankets if he di<l not sign the name of Heath, an ollicer c:une to the cell 15 where 
 he was confined, with three nice blankets and said in efiect to him : " Here, Heath, ;ne three 
 " nice wi.rm bhmkets you can have if you will sign this receipt;" he told that officer he 
 would sign his own name, that of Hatheway, but not the name of Heath ; the ollicer seemed 
 to be verv :nigiv at his refusal and took the blaidicts away. He w:is then very cold, in truth 
 and in fact nearly fro/en as it seemed to him ; his sullering was almost unendurable, but he 
 made np his mini! to suffer any pain or hardshii) imposed rather tii;ui sign a false name to 
 any paper, and he did not sign. (See Claimant's affidavit marked Ex. J.) It is further 
 shown b\' claimant's afVulavit att.achcd hereto and marked Exhibit K, that before his confine- 
 
 4 
 
nicut as herein shown lie was tidiihleil vvitli ki(hiey disease wliich was aiijjmeiited l)y reason 
 of that imprisonment and exposiiie incident thereto; that prior to ids imprisonment lie never 
 was tronhled witli rhenmatism, but diirini( his imprisonment as iierein set lortii and exposure 
 to tile intense cohl and dampness of tie ceil, he was aHlicted with scitlhess of tiie limbs and 
 pains in his side and shonldcrs, and after his release, on or ahont the 15th day of May A. D. 
 1SS5, he was attacked with a well defhied case of rhenmatism which lasted for ahont two and 
 one-iialf months, and was directly traceable to that imprisonment, and exposure incident 
 thereto. Attacks of rheumatism have recuried fiom time to time ever since, in |)eriods vary- 
 in<j; tVom one to two months, and he has been under medical treatment for a period a<j<;re- 
 {^atin<j in all, since his imprisonment, not less than nine months on account of rhemnatism 
 contracted in that cell dnrinjij his imprisoiniient. His physician. Dr. A. C liisho]), of Hntte 
 City, M(/ntana Territory, wiio treate<l him, died on or about the iSth day of April, 1S8S, l)ut 
 he has used the remeilies prescribed by Dr. Hishop since to alleviate his sutl'erings from said 
 disease. (See afKdavit of Claimant marked Ex. K hereto attached.) 
 
 It is further shown by the atlidavit of Helen S. Hathevvay, the mother of Claimant, tiiat 
 he was gently nurtured and cared for in ids minority ; that he !iad been sul)ject to kidney 
 disease; that he had attained his majority but about eight months jirior to his illegal arrest 
 and imi^risonnient ; that he had never belonged to or drilled with any military compans wiiat- 
 ever, so that there was an utter absence of tiiose drill marks by which soldiers aie at once 
 recognized as such ; that he knew nothing at all about militaiy matters ; that he had raised 
 about $2,000.00 on his property in Canada, of which he had become possessed on attaining 
 his majority, .ind taken a portion of these tinuls to IJig Horn City, Wyoming Territory ; that 
 she was inlormed of the ariest of her son about Feii. 26, 1S85, anil on tliat date she telegraphed 
 fl'e identity and citizenshij) of lier son, v.inch information was, as she has been informed, 
 at once communicated to Col. Comptcjn ; that counsel was employed at St. John. N. 13., 
 and in Hoston, and eviilence of her son's identity prepared and quickly Ibrwanled by mail ; 
 that no time was lost in fully ac(|nainting the military authorities as to her son's identity, and 
 with means of satisfying tiiemselvesas to his identity ; that her anxiety was intense and her suller- 
 ing great, during the period of his incarceration, but she was not informed of liis cruel treat- 
 ment in having been confined in an unlieated, wholly unfurnished cell, and refused bedding 
 or blankets, or permission to approach a lire, and that slie ilitl all possible to secure the release 
 of her son. 
 
 It is a fact that the thermometer not infre(iuently marks 30 degrees below zero, Fahren- 
 heit, at Fort McKinney, W^yoming, during the montiis of Febrnai}' and March. 
 
 The law and precedent governing Memorialist's case are well settled botii in Great Britain 
 and the United States. 
 
 It is not disputed to be a clear case of false imprisonment, which is defined by Sir William 
 Blackstone to be: "any confinement or detention of the person without snflicient authority." 
 (3r(l Blackstone's Com. p. 127.) 
 
 It is true that both in the British Empire and tiie United States, tlie only available remedy 
 which the law can give for such a wrong is an awaid of money estimated as an eiuivalent for 
 the damage suflered. 
 
 The measure of damages in cases of false imprisonment was very ably considered and 
 fully settled by the Lord Chief Justice of England, in 1763, in the case of Iluckle vs. Money, 
 reported in 2nd Wilson, p. 205, Michaelmas Term ( Ceo. 3. An award of three hundred 
 pounds sterling had been made by the jur} in the case of each of several printer's devils foi- 
 six hours' false imprisonment, and the Lord Chief Justice on reviewing tiie case on motion for 
 a new trial said : " I shall now state the iiatuie of the case as it apiieared upon the evidence 
 " at the trial ; a warrant was granted by Lord Halifax, Secretar}- of State, ilirected to four 
 " messengers to ajjprehend and seize the printers and publishers of a paper called the 
 " ' North Briton, number 45,' witli<nit any information or charge laid before the Secretary 
 " of State previous to the granting thereof and witiiout naming any person whomsoever in tiie 
 " warrant. Carrington, the first of the messengers to whom the warrant was directed, iVom 
 " some private intelligence he hati got that Leech was the printer of the ' North Briton, luunbei 
 " 45,' directed the ikfendant to execute the warrant upon the plaintiff, (one ot Leech's 
 " journeymen) and took him into custody for about six hours, and (hiring tlie time treated him 
 " well ; the personal injury done to him was very small, so that if the jury had been confined 
 " by their oaths to consider tiie personal i'ljury onl)-, perhaps twenty pounds damages woiihl 
 " have been thought sulHcient ; but the small injury done to the plaintiff or the inconsiderable- 
 
 5 
 
" ness of liis station and laiik in life (ii<l not n|)|R-:ir to tiie jury in tiiat stiikiiif; ligiit in whicii 
 *' tiic great j)oint of law toiicliinj; tlir lihcily of the subject appeared totlicni at the trial ; tliev 
 " saw a uiaj^istiate over ail the King's subjects exercising arliitiary jjower, violating Magna 
 '• Charta, and attenii)ting In destroy the liberty of the Kingdom by insisting upon the legality 
 " of tiiis general warrant liefoie them. »»»»♦» To enter a man's house by virtue 
 " of a nameless warrant in ()r<lei to procure evidence, is worse tiian tlie S|)anish ln(|uisition, 
 " a law undei vviiich no Englishman would wish to live an hour. It was a most tlaring public 
 " attack made upon the liberty of the subject *••*.! cannot say what damage I 
 " should have awarded if I had been on the jury ))nt I directed and told tliem they were not 
 " bound to an\' certain damages * • * . I pon the whole 1 am ot" the opinion the damages 
 '■ are not excessixe 
 
 'I'iie law as here laid down was the law oi" the North-American Colonies befoie the in- 
 dependence of the United States, and is the law to-tlay in both Great Britain and the Ihiited 
 States. Addison in his work on Torts, lulition iNSj, j). 163 says: "When the assault is 
 >■ accompanied bv a false charge atlecting the iionor or charactei' and position in society of 
 " tiie plainlitl'tiie oU'ence will of course be greatly aggravated and the damages proportionally 
 " increased, and if the plaintill has been assaulterl and imprisoned luuler a false charge of 
 " felony, when no felony had been committed, <ir when there was no reasonable grounils for 
 " suspecting or charging the plaintill", exemplary damages will be recovered." 
 
 In the case of Kili)ourn \s. Thompson, 103 L'niteil States reports, p. 16S, Mr. Justice 
 Miller, in pionnuncing the opinion of the Supreme Couit of the United States said: " The 
 " general doctrine that the person who procures the arrest of another by judicial process, by 
 '* instituting and conducting the proceedings, is liable to an action for false imprisonment, 
 " where he acts without probable cause, is not to be controverted." 
 
 The authorities are numerous in i>oth Englan*; and the United States sustaining the po- 
 sition th:it arrest :c'//'//««/ jiulicial warrant, pr(;cess and legal warrant is also false imprison- 
 ment. 
 
 Ill the case of Kilbourn \s. Thompson, cited supra, which aiose in the District of Co- 
 hmibia, in the United States. Kilbourn had been arresteil on an order of the Mouse of 
 Representatives and was detaineil in the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House, 
 Thompson, for a month and a half, about. It was not disjiuted that liuring his mild impris- 
 onment he lived sumptuously at the expense of the government of the United States, and that 
 he was permitted to sutler no special indignitv ; his alleged oll'ense was contempt of the House 
 of Representatives in refusing to a! \ er at the bar of the I louse, certain (juestions propounded 
 to him in an investigation conclude. i by a Committee of the House. Upon action brought 
 against the Sergeant-at-Arms for false imprisonment, the jury lirst awarded the sum of 
 .$ioo,ooo.cx) ; this was set aside by the court as accessive ; on a second trial an award of 
 $60,000.00 was matle by the jury, which was also set aside on the same ground, and another 
 trial had. resulting in a verdict of $37, orxj.ot), upon which the court allowed a judgment of 
 $.:o, 000.00 to be entered in Kilbourn's favor on his abatement of $17,500.00. 
 
 vSutherland in his work on Damages, Vol. HI, page 731 says: " The injury of being il- 
 " legally restrained of one's liberty is akin to that sulFered from assaidt and battery. The 
 " injmed party in such cases, even though the act complained of be done without malice, is 
 " entitled to recoxei' tiie expenses reasonably incurred to procure discharge I'rom the restraint. 
 " for loss of ,imc, interrui)tion of his business aiul the sutlering, bodily and mentally which 
 " the wri)ng may have occasioned. The filthy condition of the jail in which the plaintill" was 
 " confmed, or any (/ther discomforts or deprivation, may be shown to enhance compeirsatory 
 " damages for mental anguish and discomfort. The plaintill" may recover for loss of work 
 " not only up to tlie time of the suit, but .also for the time lost after the suit, if by the arrest 
 " he failed to get work he otherwise would have obtained." 
 
 The public arrcot of Memorialist under the charge of horse-stealing has been shown in 
 the testimony heretofore submittcil, and was ]5articularly damaging to ^lemorialist's character 
 in the section where he was arrested, wherein no felony, not even murder, is held by the 
 conmumity in greater abhorrence. The indignity heaped upon him in being sliackle<l with 
 irons on his wrists and ankles for more than tliirty-six hours ; the deprivation of a bed iluring 
 two nights at a public house which was the scene of his arrest; his intimidation by reason of 
 the sentry standing over him continuouslv during this period with loaded carbine; the as- 
 surance ot instant tleath in case he attempted to escape ; his confinement in aii out-house. 
 
without l)i'(l, iit the laiicli uii I'inc Creek en route ti> Foil Mi Kinney, a sentinel witli loaded 
 cail)ine still sfandiu}^ over liim ; his Iniital treatment at I'ort McKinni'\, having' heen eon- 
 lined in the dark, dami), cold and conlined space as shown, in cell 15, <levoid oi I'nrniture nl' 
 any kind ; tiie denial to him of bed, heddinji or blankets, and assurance ot" ollicers that he 
 inijjht iVee/.c if he would not sij^ii the name ot" Heath; the relineinent of cruelty in placing; 
 before iiim three nice warni blankets when he was snfl'erint; intensely with cold from physical 
 cNbaustion incident to three sleepless ni^dits spent without bed and under jjuard of a soldier 
 with loaded carbine accompanviiiH; tiie alliniii",' blankets witii tlie assurance tiiat they were 
 his if he would falseh' sij;n the name of the deserter Heatli, wiiose identity his jailors were 
 alteuiptiii)^ to fasten upon him ; his subsecjuent incarceration without blaid^et or beddin;^ of 
 any kind or furniture in the cell, witii the convict named Iluj^hes; his denial of permission 
 to approach the lire in the intense ccdd of a W'yoniin;; winter, constitute ten da\s of sutleriiif^ 
 such as \% scared)' concei\able amoii<,' prisoners held by lMiL;lisli s])e:d<in<^ peoi)le. ICnlij^ht- 
 ened Inunauily stands appalled at the knowledge of ciuelties like these inllicted upon jjrisou- 
 ers exiles to the mines of Siberia in Russia ; but in no other country can a parallel be found 
 in this day for the cruelties to which Memorialist was subjected. 
 
 The law of both (ireat Britain and the United States is so well settled in the matter of 
 false impiisonment, and adjudicated cases are so lunuerous in luij^dand, the Dominion of 
 Canada and the various states of the I'nited Slates, that it is deemed unnecessary to (Micumber 
 this memorial with further citati(jns from elementary wiiters or judicial tiecisions ; a few 
 cases in ilipKmiacy are, however, ap[)ended, sliowin<j abundatU jjrecedent for proper com|)en- 
 sation to Memorialist as claimed. Both (ireat Ibitain and the I'nited States have constantly 
 insisted upon fair compensation wlieie the subject of the one or the citi/en of the othei had 
 been subjected to false iniprisomnent. 
 
 In the case of Alfred Pierrepont Edwards, a citizen of the United States, f'or false impris- 
 oiHUcnt by the military authorities of China, in iS.fi , reported in Executive Document No. 
 ifj, House of Representative's, 40th Conj^ress, 3rd Session, it is shown that on the inoiiiinj^ of 
 the 17th of November, 1S41, Ivlwards left W'hampoa in an open l)oat for Canton ; when pas- 
 sing; (juietly !))■ the island of Honan he was hailed by a party of Chinese military, stationed 
 at that island, luid (udered to come ashore. He promptly olieyed the order and iiumediately 
 on reaching the land a large party of Chinese soldiers, amounting to several hundred under 
 the connuand of an oflicer of rank, rushed upon him in the most savage maimer, and without 
 the slightest provocation secured bis hands by l)in<ling them behind his back with a co"d in so 
 cruel a manner as entirely to impede the circuiatiou of tiie blood ; his pockets were th-ju rifled 
 after cutting them entirely oil" his coat; his moiie>', watch and various articles of value were 
 also taken from him, he not ollering the slightest resistance ; a heavy iron chain of the size of 
 a common ox-chain and weighing several pounds, was then placed around his neck and se- 
 cured in front by a large lock; he was then conducted to a loathsome cell by a strong guard 
 armed witii loaded matcii-locks, swords and spears, and lef"l in conlinement for several 
 hours under guard ol" l"our soldiers, bound and ciiained in the most painful manner, moment- 
 arily expecting to be massacred by Chinese soldiers ; he was then taken across the ishuul and 
 l^laced in a boat under guard of forty soldiers and rowed over the river to Canton and literally 
 dragged by the chain attaidied to his neck for about four miles to the place of the Clum-Tuck, 
 or Vice-Hoy of the Euiperor of China's principal representative in that part of his Empire; 
 af"ter remaining in close confinement for several hours he was taken before the Mandarin, or 
 chief magistrate, still b(niiul ami chained, to be examined. By the intercession of an ac- 
 ([uaintance he was released and assisted to his lodgings. The key to the lock which conlined 
 the chain to the neck had been lost and it bec.une necessary to lay his head on an anvil and by 
 repeated blows by a chisel and sledge hammer to remove the chain from his neck ; he suffered 
 af"terwaril from the effects of his bad treatment. The explanation of his arrest was — mistaken 
 identity. His imprisonment lasted but a few hours. He was awarded and paid on repre- 
 sentation of his goveriunent, by the Chinese government, the sum of $10,000.00, with interest 
 for eighteen years, .$21,600.00, or in all the sum of $31 ,600.00. No actual damage was 
 shown in this case beyond that to his person. (See claims against China 3ril Session, 40th 
 Congress, 1S6S and 1869, \ip. 100 and i6o.) 
 
 There is a strong similarity between the case of l-2(lwards and that of Memorialist, in that 
 each was arrested by the military of the nation in which he was commorant ; each was a case 
 of mistaken identity ; each was shackled with irons, and guarded by soldiers with arms in 
 their hands ; each sutVered afterwards from the effects of his harsh treatment; l)ut Edwards' 
 
impiisoniiieiit lasted but a few hours, v/hile Memorialist's lasted for many days and nights, 
 and liis treatment was the more rigorous of the t\v( in that lie was left to the severity of a 
 February winter in Wyoming as one of the incidents of torture ; Edwards did not sutler in 
 his i)usiness or reputation, while Memorialist was wholly destroyed in both at the place of 
 his domicile. 
 
 Ill cases referred to in rejiort of Robert vS. Hale, agent and counsel of the United States, 
 papers relating to tiie treaty of Washington, Vol. VI., p. 6S, the case of William Patrick, the 
 claimant, a Ibitish merchant, domiciled in New York, was, on the 28th of August, iiS6i, 
 airested and committed to Fort LaFayette, where he was detained till the 13th of September 
 Ibllowing, when lie was ilischarged. Ilis arrest was based on the charge that the firm in New 
 ■S'orK, of which he was a member, ami whicii had a branch liouse also at Moliile, Ala., was 
 a ciiannei for carrying on corresjiondence between rebels in Europe and those in tiie insur- 
 rection.-ny states. Representation by hif^hly respectable citizens of New \'oik, of Mr. Patrick's 
 loyalty were made to the Secretary of State, and the British Minister also interfered in his 
 behalf Invchtigation showed that the charge against him was without foundation, and he 
 was (iiscliarged alter a conllnement of seventeen days. The proofs establishetl Mr. Patrick's 
 social standing to be high, and also to have been in conduct marked by loyalty atvd good 
 faith to the government of the L'nited States (.luring the rebellion and to have furnished liberal 
 contributions to its aid. His arrest was undoid)te(lly caused by false or erroneous intbrmation. 
 On behalf of the claimant punitory damages were claimed. On the part of the United 
 States it was insisted that no such damages could be alloweil ; that Mr. Patrick, domicileil 
 within the United States, was exposed in the same degree with citizens of those states to arrest 
 on fdse chai'ges or erroneous information, and that, having been discharged within a reason- 
 able time for in(|uiry to be made, he was not entitled to claim damages against the United 
 States; that if any damages were awarded they shoidd be such only as would allbrd him fair 
 compensation tor the injury inflicted. The Conuiiission awarded $5,160.00, or about $3cxj.oo 
 per da}-, Mr. Conuiiissioner Guiuey (the British Commissioner) dissenting on the (juestion of 
 amount. 
 
 In the same report, p. 64, is reported the case of John Carville Storin, a British subject. 
 No. 23, who was arrested at Cumberland, Maryland, in October, 1S61, on the charge of dis- 
 loyalty, in attending secession meetings in Cimibeilanil and being the means of transmitting 
 intbrmation tcj the enemv. He was taken to Ft. Mcllenry and there detained about five weeks 
 and ilischarged without trial. He alleged that his business as a mamifacturer at Cumberland 
 was stoppetl ;md in eflect tiestroyed. He alleged ill treatment while in confinement. Proofs 
 were taken on both sides on the (juestion of his disloyal conduct and it was contended on the 
 part of the United States that the facts justified h's arrest as a disloyal person, opeidy giving 
 aid and conitbrt to the rebellion by his language and e.xpression of .sympathy in a village 
 situated on the frontier of the enemy's country, and where such conduct involved danger to 
 the military operations of the United States. 
 
 The Conunission gave an award to the Claimant of $8,300.00, all the Commissioners 
 joining. In the same Report p. 66, case No. 51, is reported the case of John J. Shaver, a 
 British subject, who was arrested at Detroit, Mich., Oct. 15th, i86i,and confined in Ft. 
 LaFayette and Ft. Warren until Jan. 6th, 1S63, two months and twenty days. His loss of 
 situation was pressed in assessing damages. He was awarded $30,204.00, or about $375.00 
 per d;iy. 
 
 Other cases might be cited from the same report which were pressed by the British 
 government to damages before the Conunission under the treaty of Washington, but enough 
 have heen cited to show the tendency of precedent. 
 
 One other case illustrative of the attitude of the United States upon the subject of false 
 imprisonment, at this time, will be cited, namely, that of Charles Adrian Van Bokkelen, a 
 citizen of the United States who was imprisoned by the Republic of Hayti without sutlicient 
 legal warrant though under the forms of law, for ;i period of less than fifieen months. Under 
 a i)rotocol of agreement lietween the governments of the United States and Hayti the case was 
 submitted to an arl)itrator who awarded claimant the simi of $60,000.00, by his award dated 
 December 4th, 1888. Protocol of agreement signed May .:4th, 1888. 
 
 Hut it is submitted that in none of the cases herein cited, in which awards have ranged 
 from $4,o<30.cxj to over $10,000.00 per month, have the specially aggravating circumstances 
 existed which surround and attach to the case of Alemorialist. The case of Edwards against 
 China approaches most nearly his, yet Edwards was released within a few hours while 
 
 8 
 
Mfiiiorialist was confined thirty-two days, of wliicli time ten days iiivohcd continnoiis and 
 excruciating^ l)iiysical snUerinj;, and all the time was attendeil with ^rcat luxlily disconitoi I anil 
 mental anxiety. 
 
 Again no reparation afl'ecting the reputation ot" Memorialist lias been otlereil. Tiie 
 Secretary of War at Wasiiington, on the 17th of March, 1SS5, telegraphed the motliei of 
 Memorialist as follows : 
 
 " Your telegram received. My attention has already been drawn to the case of your son 
 " and I have given orders which will insure justice being done in the matter. (Signed), Win. 
 " C. Endicott, Secretary of War." (See copy of telegram hereto attached marked Exhibit M 
 and made a part hereof.) 
 
 On the 33ril of Maich, six days later, R. C. Drum, the Adjutant (jencral of the United 
 States Armv, telegraphed llnited States Senator George F. Etlmunds of X'erniont, as follows: 
 " Artiiur lirnest Hathevvay, who was held as a deserter at Fort McKinnoy, Wyoming, has 
 " been ac([uitted by a Court Martial. Particidars of the trial not yet known. (.Signed), K. C. 
 " Drum." (See copy of telegram hereto attached and made a part hereof marked Exhibit 1'.) 
 
 On tiie 28th of March eleven ilays after the order of the Secretary of War which was 
 intended to insure that justice would be done, George Ruggles, an Assistant ^Vdjutant (ieneral 
 of the United States Army wrote Mr. S. W. Hathevvay, of counsel in the tasrc, as follows: 
 " In reply to your letter of the aSth ultimo, enclosing papers in the case of .:\.rthur Ernest 
 " Mathevva}', who was recently arrested as a deserter from the army, I have tlu: honor to intbrm 
 " you that the man was actjuitted by a general court martial ; and that telegraphic instructions 
 " for his innnediate release were given by the Department on the 25th instant." (See original 
 letter hereto attached and made a part hereof marked Exhibit R). 
 
 By reference to tiie proceedings of the Court Martial already a part of tiiis case on lile. it 
 will be seen the War Department at Washington was misled and gave erroneous information 
 respecting the accpiittal of Memorialist, as per the communications just qvtoted. 
 
 If Memorialist's intbrmation is correct, as he believes it to be, the Coiut was convened 
 uniler Special Orilers No. 96, issued by Maj. Genl. O. O. Howard, Head (Quarters, Depart- 
 ment of tiie Platte, dated Nov. ist, 1884, and subsequent Special Orders issued from the same 
 Head (Quarters in 1S85, Numliered 2 and 4. If the record can be relied •pon, that Court did 
 not try tills Memorialist at all ; tiie record discloses the trial of Private Alfred I[eatlt/V\oo\i 
 K, 5th. L'. S. Cavalry, upon two charges, one of desertion, the other hoise-stealing. 
 
 Memorialist has never been furnished with the findings of that court before which he in 
 fact was compelled to appear and which did in fact try him, ami he is not informed what the 
 fiiudngs actually were but it is in evidence in this case already, upon the sworn statement of 
 Charles H. Burritt, Estj., his counsel at the trial by that court, aitidavit dated Sept. ytii, 1S85, 
 as follows : " The special plea entered by me was substantially that my client was not Alfred 
 " Heath and that he was Arthur Ernest Hatliev.';>y and had never been enlisted m tlie United 
 " States Army. The proof was overwhelming and undenied that Alfred Heath was a deserter 
 " and a horse-thief. It was also clearly established that my client's special plea was true, and 
 " notwithstanding this, the Court Martial, as I learned with surprise, when the verdict was 
 " made public, completely ignored the special plea a .d contrarv to the evidence rendered a 
 " verdict that Alfred Heath was " 7iot guilty" 
 
 So that it was Private Heath, and not this Memorialist, who was actjuitted by the Court 
 Martial, and statements to the eilect that Memorialist was accjuitted are in fact not true so far 
 as this Memorialist is informed and l>elieves ; no attempt has ever been made, so far as he is 
 aware, to publish his acquittal of the charge brought against him, if he was in tact acquitted, 
 citiier in the army, at his home in St, John, at the town of Big Horn where he was arrested 
 or elsewhere, but on the contrary the tendency of the proceedings have been since the tiial as 
 well as at the trial, as he l)elieves, to suppress correct information of his arrest, treatment 
 jiending trial and at the trial, and all the circumstances surrounding the case ; that it has been 
 the wish of the ofKcers of the Army of the United States involved in the proceedings to hush 
 the matter up as far as practicable. In no sense had the order of the Secretary of War, issued 
 with a view that justice be done in the matter, been executed. He has received no official 
 acknowledgment of the wrong inflicted upon him, and no oH'er of adequate compensation in 
 money. There has been received by S. W. Hatheway, Estj., of Counsel for Memorialist a 
 communication from the Second Auditor of the United States Treasmy, o! wliicii the follow- 
 ing is a coiw, said communication having reached Coimsel since the preparation of this niv- 
 morial was commenced : 
 
 9 
 
TuiiASlKV DiU'ARTMKNT. SlCCOND AUDlTOU's OfI'ICK, ] 
 
 Wasiiin(;t()N, D. C, June 22iul, 18S9. | 
 
 S. W. IIatiikwav, Es(\., No. 34 Scliool St., IJu.stoii. Mass. 
 
 .S», — Rolliiiii;^ to letter of tliis OHicf .ukiresscd to you 011 tlie 231(1 iilt., statinj^ tlie 
 action of the accounting; olliccis of the Treasury, in tlie case of Aitluir Ernest Ilatlievvay, I 
 have the honor to inform you that, at the retiuest of the Secretary of War, tlie Second Comp- 
 troller has reconsidered the action of his ollice in the premises and has allowed the sum rec- 
 onunended 1)V the Secretary of W'ar, viz. : $i,(joo.oo. A draft for v\'liich amount, payable to 
 the order of Arthur 1'2. Ilatiicway, will be forwarded, tiu-on<;h tiie Department of .State, to 
 the Hritibh Minister, Washington, D. C. Respectfully yours, 
 
 J. N. Pat I liiisoN, Auditor. 
 , " Hy M. C. T. 
 
 ^\s stated in tlie opening of this memorial the ofl'er of one thousand d(.ii:i)s was respect- 
 ftdlv declined by letter of Memorialist's saiil Counsel, to the 1 loiiorable G. Powell, under 
 Secretary of State, for Canada, dated March 22iid, 18S9, to which attention was invited. 
 Mi'iiiorialist has not ciiiiii<;eil liis attitude in this behalf since his former declination ( f the 
 prolleied sum for the reason heretofore assij^ned : That tiic same is wholly iiiade(|uate. It is 
 submitted that au)' sum less than ten thousand dollars is inade([uate. It has been shown 
 he lost not less than $3,o<jo.(X) in property at Hig Horn City in consequence of his ar- 
 rest and imprisoiuiient ; His counsel fees at Fort McKiimey, paid and unpaiil, together with 
 his expenses in counsel fees and other costs at St. John and Boston pending his impris- 
 o ment and otlier ex[)enses incident thereto, will not be less than $500.00; ho has sutlered 
 lu/t less than nine months in the aggregate with rheumatism, traceable directly to his impris- 
 onment, since his release, during which time he was under the care of a physician, ami conse- 
 (luently unable to pursue his ordinary avocations, for which it is submitted the sum of 
 $2,000.00 is a very reasonable compensation ; and it is further submitted that $4,500.00 is a 
 reasonable, if not an inadequate sum in compensation tor his mental and physical sulferings dur- 
 ing his incarceration, together with the injury tlone his credit and destruction of his business in 
 ci)iise([iience of the charge of felony brought against him, when no felony hatl been committed 
 in fact. His case falls, too, within that class wherein exemplary damages are awarded, and 
 the law and precedent bear him out -..i h's view that the sum of $10,000.00 is but a reasonable 
 demand ; he therefore retpiests the representation of his ca.se upon a basis of tliat demand. 
 
 The good Offices of Memorialist's government are further invoked to the end that if 
 reasonable compensation l)e denied by the government of the Lhiited .States upon the presen- 
 tation herein a.sked, then that the government of the United States be requested and urged in 
 the alternative to consent to the submission of the case of Memorialist to arbitration under a 
 protocol ol' agreement between the two governments, one referee to be chosen by each gov- 
 ernment and the\- two to choose a third, the compensation of referees to be ])ai(l bv the Uniteil 
 Stati.-s, and any award to be paid by the United .States within six months from the date of 
 such award. 
 
 Dated at VVasiiin'(;ton. D. C, June 27th, 1889. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 ARTHUR ERNEST HATHEWAY, Memorialist. 
 By J. M. Vai.ic, of his Counsel. 
 Tkuum >i{v Ol' Montana, ' 
 
 COUNTV OK MiSSOl ' A. I 
 
 I. .Vrthur ErneM Hatheway, l)eing lirst duly sworn, do state on (jatli in the matter of my 
 imprisonment at Fort McKinney, Wyoming Te.ritory, in addition to sworn statements here- 
 tofore made, that during the time he \vas confined without (ire or blankets, bedding or furni- 
 ture of any kind in the cell marked " 13," on the plan of the prison heietofore submitted in 
 his case and made a part thereof, between the 23rd and 26th of February A. I). 1885, after 
 he iiad been ordered into solitary conlinenient, having refused to sign the name of Heath at 
 the request of one Capt. Forbush, and after having been toUl by said OUiccr he might freeze 
 
 10 
 
if he would not so sign, and that he could not have any blankets if he did not sign the name 
 of Heath, an Officer caine to the cell " H", where he was confnied, with three nice blankets 
 and said in cflect to atliant " Here, Heath, are three nice warm liliuiketsyou can have if 30U 
 " will sii,Mi this receipt ; " alli.-.nt told the OHicer he would si<j;n his. own name, that of Hath- 
 eway, but not the name of //c(?///. The Otlicer seemed very angry at atliant's refusal and 
 took the blankets awav. Alliant was then very cold, in truth and in fact nearly frozen as it 
 seemed to him ; his sullering was almost unenilural)le, Init lie made up his mind to sulfer any 
 pain or hardship imposed rather than sign a false name to any paper, and he did I'ot sign. 
 
 ARTHUR ERNEST HATHEVVAY. 
 
 Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notarv Public, in and for the County :nid Territory 
 aforesaid, this 19th day of June, A. D. iSSy. 
 
 Fhank H. W'ooin-. Notarv Public. 
 
 EXHIiUT K 
 
 TiciuuTonY OK Montana, \ 
 CoiINTV OF Missoii.A. I 
 
 s. s. 
 
 I, 7Vrtl)ur Ernest Hatheway, being iirst duly sworn, do depose and say, that I am the 
 identical person who was conf'..'?'! by the Military Authorities of the United States of America, 
 at Fort McKinney, in the Territory of Wyoming between February 2otii, 1SS5, and March 
 23r(l, 1885 ; that before said conlinement I was troubled with kidney <lisease which was aug- 
 mented by reason of that conlinement and the exposure incident thereto ; tiiat prior to said 
 confuiement I never was atllicted with rheumatism, but during my said conlinement as afore- 
 said, -ind exposure to the intense cold, and the dampness of my prison cell while it lasted, 1 
 was afllictetl with stiflness of the limbs anil pains in my side and shoulders, and after my 
 release, on or about the 15th day of May, 1885, I was attacked with a well defined case of 
 liieumalism which lasted for about two and one-half months, and was directly traceable to that 
 imprisonment, and the exposure incident thereto. 
 
 That attacks of rheumatism have recurred from time to time ever since, in periods vary- 
 ing from one to two months, and that I have l)cen under medical treatment for a period 
 aggregating in all since my said imprisonment as above stated, not less than nine months, on 
 account of rheumatism contracted in tiiat cell during my said imiirisonment. I further state 
 that the Physician (Dr. A. C. Bishop) of Hi'.tte City, Montana Territory, who trei.'ed me, 
 died on or about the iSth day of April, 1888, but that since his death, whenever I was attack- 
 ed with said disease, I have used the re ledies that he prescribed for me to alleviate my sulfer- 
 ings from said disease. 
 
 ARTHUR 1:RNEST HATHEWAY. 
 
 I, Fraid< II. Woody, a Notary Public in and for Missoula County, Montana Territory, do 
 iiereby certify that the foregoing ailidavit was subscribed and sworn to before me at Missoula, 
 Mi.ssoula County, Montana Territory, on this 15th day of June, 1889, by the said Arthur 
 Ernest Hatheway, and that the said per.son above named is well and personally known to mc, 
 and that he is a person to whose ailidavit full faitii and ciedit arc tlue. 
 
 FRANK H. WOODY, 
 
 Notary Public. 
 
EXIIiniT L. 
 Ill the case of 
 
 ARTHUR ERNES r HATIIEWAY, 
 
 Aflidavit of lIii.KV S. Ha iiikwav, widow; 
 
 •>f St. John, N. H., Canada. 
 
 1, Heljii S. Hatlieway, widow of Tiiomas Hatheway, of tho city of St. John in tlie 
 Province of New ]5iunswici<, Dominion of Canada, on oath dcposi' and say : 
 
 I live in said St. John wlieie I resided ahnost continnonsly since my marriaj^e to said 
 'I'liomas Hatheway, and raised to adult age seven of our children the youngest of whom is 
 Artlnu' Ernest Hatheway. 
 
 I am now temporarily residing in Dedhain, in the state of Massachusetts for my liealtii, 
 having come here tiiis spring from said St. John. I was here also in the year 18S5 and in 
 I'eliruary 1885 was residing in Dedham Village with my daughter Agnes A. Hatheway then 
 .in invalid, now Mrs. C \V. Lombard of Missoula, Montana, where also 1 have two sons in 
 husiness, married and having large families. 
 
 My said son Arthur Ernest Hatheway is now my yoimgest son. He became twenty-one 
 vears of age on Jiuic 7th, 18S4. For several years before that he hail been visiting from time 
 to time in tiie states of Maine and Massachusetts and for some months in the year 01 winter of 
 1883-4 '"-' ^"^'"^ •'' t^''^' ''^I'^'tJp Ranch of Weatherbee and Billings, at or near Rock Creek, 
 Wyoming, seeking a situation. Saiil Weatherbee is George W. Weatherbee of Dedliam, one 
 of tlie Selectmen of this town. 
 
 My husband died December 12, 1871. Up to that time we had lived in comfort, if not 
 luxury, and for some vears afterward my circumstances were such that my children had no 
 occasion to do any kinil of work to help me, but in the year 1S83 a large amount of our pro- 
 jiertv had been dissipated and rentals of real estate in vSt. John had much decreased s(Vthat my 
 son Arthur Ernest noticed the enforced change in our manner of life and he then became am- 
 bitious to ilo .ionietbing to restore my impairetl foitunes. This led to his journey to Rock 
 Creek, W'yoming, and his stay for some months there and in Laramie City, and when he re- 
 turned in the spring of 1S84 it was with the avowed intentions of raising money on his pioperty 
 in St. Joini as soon as he came of age and going into business in the West. I was opposed to 
 it because I knew him to be of delicate constitution, never robust. He had been out at 
 Missoula for a year on a visit to his brother Thomas Gilbert Hatheway and while tbeie had 
 worked as a boy for Eddy, Hammond & Co. and came home with his earnings and a good 
 recommendation, proud of his success, but it was evident he could not stand such hard work. 
 He has always siiowed symptons of weakness in the region of the kidneys. However, business 
 matters weie growing worse with us, property was rapi<lly depreciating in St. John, my 
 daughter's hcaltii was wretched and I was suflering from bronchial troubles and the boy was 
 determined to strike out and liiake money, and so in September 1884, immediately after coming 
 of age. he mortgaged his St. John property for about Two Thousand dollars and went out to 
 l)ig Horn, Wyoming, a place of which he had seen glowing advertisements in the newspapers 
 and which he knew was not far from Ft. McKinney, a United States Military Post. From 
 there he wrote freciuently to myself and his sister encoiuaging letters, that he had bought land 
 and erected a builtling and was begimiing to start a business that should grow to be a general 
 store like that he had worked in at Missoula. The next I heard was, on or about Feb. 26th, 
 18185, I rei ived a telegram from Charles II. Burritt, Esq., of BuH'alo, Wyoming, that my 
 said son w. - arrested for desertion, that the authorities claim enlistment December, 1879 and 
 the telegram added " Telegraph immediately his whereabouts at that date, I am his counsel." 
 
 1 did the best I could — the best we could, my invalid daughter and myself — we made 
 haste to Boston, ten miles, and retained counsel for my son and telegraphed to lawyer Burritt 
 and engaged counsel at St. John, N. B., directing them to prepare the necessary evidence, iuid 
 I personally saw all the persons whom I thought likely to help. 
 
 Wc all thought there was some dreadlul conspiracy to hurt my son. He had never even 
 ill play drilled or acted soldier and had never enlisted in any compaiu' or militar}' service, 
 \()iuiitee]- or regular. It was diflicult for mc to remember back five or six years to tell his 
 actual whereabouts in December. 1879 and in my excitement I got things confused and there 
 was much trouble in preparing the ailidavits. I was not at my St. John home and had not 
 near me friends who could assist me to recall dates so as to be correct and 1 was advised tliat 
 
 13 
 
sucli evidence to be submitted to a Court Miutiai must he accurate. I was also under great 
 tear and excitement for I i<new tiiat Couit Maitials were very strict ant! that tiie linUed States 
 Army OHicers in tlie West were over anxious to catch ileserters and my counsel and friends 
 could not allay my fears. Myself and my daughter and all the friends we coulil enlist went to 
 work and by March 2, 1S85, working continuously from the time I received the teles ."ui we 
 succeeded in sending to Mr. Burritt for use in my son's defense the afKdavits of 'ieniamin 
 Weatherbee, George W. VVeatherbee, F. W. Baker, Anna M. Dean, S. Jennie Dea" v.'arrie 
 E. Mutman, Simon W. Ilatheway, Agnes A. Ilatheway and myself, also a second aliidavit of 
 Geo. W. VVeatherbee and seconel of myself. I also wrote letters to many persons about the 
 matter and so did my daughter Agnes A. Hatheway, and my sou's 13oston counsel wrote to 
 George F. Hatheway, Warren Morse, Sir Leonard Tilly of New Bnmswick, the United States 
 Secretary of War, the British Minister at Wasl.ington (enclosing to him copies of cei tain aili- 
 davits) Arthur Ernest Hatheway, Chailes H. Burritt, and others advising aliout tlie matter and 
 calhns," f(n' further evidence, &c., ike. 
 
 The telegram which I sent to Charles H. Burritt, Esq., in answer to his to me, was dated 
 and sent I think Feby. 26, 18S5, and read substantiallv as follows: " -My son Arthur Ernest 
 " is British subject, became of age last June. December seventy-nine, lived with me in Ded- 
 " ham. AiVidavits by mail." And its substance was comnuniicated by said Burritt (so he 
 states) to Col. Compton commanding at Fort McKimiey early in March, 1NS5, or before March 
 18S5. From this time on iluring the whole month of my son's imprisonment my excitement 
 and fears and the agitatic-s and excitement of my daughter so injiuious to her health continued 
 uiuemitted, and we were writing letters and sendii;g telegrams in every direction and necessa- 
 rily long dist;|nces to awaken interest in the case and make sure that no point was neglected. 
 My daughter and several peisons in Dedham who knew my son made ready to go out to be 
 present at the Court Martial as witnesses and all the calculations had to be made and their time 
 arranged for and business arrangements made. 
 
 Early in March we received information of the circumstances of his arrest, how the 
 United States authorities had accepted as informers men of the lowest standing, utterly dis- 
 reputable persons, and had oil'ereti these men the usual reward of thirty dollars for bringing 
 in the alleged tleserter and that these men hail declined the oiler, which was as I am intbrmeil 
 a most suspicious circumstance, that in declining the oiler they had informed the United 
 States Army officers that they " could get Hatheway any time as he would not run for he 
 " owneil property in Big Horn," and that two weeks Liter the soldiers came and took him at 
 nightfall. These circumstances we were advised indicated a degree of negligence or reckless- 
 ness that could hardly be attributed to anything but conspiracy, in which one or mc, e of the 
 arresting parties were interested, and oiu" counsel coidd not deny but the case looked desper- 
 ate and we were obliged to keep doing our utmost. To ilefray part of the expenses and to 
 give counsel at Butl'alo an earnest of our intention to pay for his services, we had to raise 
 money, and as it was in the iniildle of a quarter anil I could get no income except from St. 
 John properties on the next rent day, May ist, my daughter mortgaged her piano to i^aise a 
 little money I r our need. Of course we have since paid these counsel fees and expenses 
 except to the lioston counsel, and all these are to be repaiil by my son. 
 
 My husband, during all his lifetime, was prosperous in business and was considered 
 well-to-do or even rich, as compared with other merchants in the Province of New Bruns- 
 wick, and he enjoyed the acquaintance and confidence of sucli men as Hon. Charles Tupper, 
 now the Canadian Minister of Finance, Hon. Sir Leonard Tilley, foi" long time Governor of 
 New Brunswick, Hon. John 15oyd and many other distinguished men in Canada. 
 
 We lived a long life together, and of our twelve children seven now survive, by six of 
 whom I am a grandparent, and I was already ..1 1SS5 entitled to be spared such grief and 
 aflliction as was caused by the wicked arrest and imprisonment of mv youngest son, a victim 
 to his impruder.'^ zeal in my behalf, venturing into a wild country anil trusting too confidently 
 to the power of tfie Lhiited States Government to protect persons going there to settle, in 
 answer to invitations extended to them in most flattering terms b}' corporations created or fa- 
 voreil by that Government. 
 
 I have very carefully read over and considereil this aflidavit, and I f'el as if I ought to 
 use stronger language to describe the condition of mind of myself and daughter anil all our 
 family and friends when the news came of my son Arthur lirnest's arrest on those false 
 charges and tor the whole month of his imprisonment. Distant two thousand miles or nearly 
 that from the scene of his ill-treatment, fbiu' hunilred miles from my nearest son, eight day's 
 
 »3 
 
time for a k-ttcr one way, only some one in my position can realize my af(ony of donht and 
 fear. I was persuaded to believe it was detention merely, not incarceration, and that was 
 well, for liad I known tliat my boy was in a damp cell in solitary confinement and denied 
 bedd'ini,' for tlnee I'^ebniary ni<,dits, tb.e suHerinf^^ would have been beyond my strength ; and 
 mv soiH onlv his mother can realize what was his snU'ering. The best was for him ; his del- 
 icate health and his striking resemblance to my daughter Louisa, who had passeil away after 
 years of sulVering, made him especially dear to us, and all were considerate of him, eager to 
 show him kindness in every way, and the fust awakening he had to the rough world was 
 when armed soldiers placed manacles on his wrists and marched him thirty miles to a prison. 
 1 believe that that horrible outrage must account for the depression of mind and sickness of 
 liodv which, he writes me. now freiiuently interfere with his etlbrts and prevent his success. 
 The mere mortincation of it was enough to break him down, to jMevent his taking hold with 
 energy on any new enterprise and to aggravate the weakness of his youth which he was mak- 
 ing so brave an etlbrt to overcome. 
 
 1 recall now that owing to batl weather my telegram to C. II. Burritt, Esq., in answer to 
 his first telegram was delaved several days, and in tlic meanwhile I was advised that in case, 
 by reason of our failure to intervene in the cause, my son should be convicted, he would be 
 sentenced to ten year's imprisonment in Fort Leavonworth for the alleged desertion, if not 
 shot, and that theniere accusation of horse-stealing was considered in that country a justification 
 of lynch law. I attach hereto a letter received by me from Charles II. Burritt, E.scp, by due 
 course of mail about March 6, 1SS5. 
 
 HELEN S. IIATHEWAY. 
 
 C()MM()N\vi:Ai/rii OK MA.ssAciirsi:r'j\s. 
 
 Noiiioi.K, s. s. 
 
 - . , I)i:i>iiA.M, May zt„ IcSScj. 
 
 Then personallv appeared the above named Helen S. llatlieway and niade oath that the 
 foregoing statement by her, subscribed in my presence, is true. 
 
 Before me, 
 
 , . Simon W. Hathiiw.w, Justice of the Peace. 
 
 I'Al'ER MADE A PART OF EXHIBIT L. 
 
 Ibillalo, Johnson County, Wyoming Territory, 
 
 February 26th, 18S5. 
 Mrs. Helen S. Ilatheway, Dedham, Mass. 
 
 My dear madam : 
 
 I sent vou last evening a message by wire, briefly advising yon 
 that your .son Arthur Ernest Ilatheway was under arrest, charged with desertion from 
 Ihe United States .Army. 'J"he charge against him is: That under the name of Alfred 
 Heath, he enlisted in the :nniy Decemlier 26lh, i>S7y, and on the evening of July i.}tli, 
 18S1, he deserted from Fort Laramie, Wyoming, taking witli him a government horse 
 and a pistol. It can be seen at a glance that the whereabouts of your son on December 
 26th, 1S79, and July 14th, 1881, is of the utmost importance. Your .son's statement is 
 as follows: Born June 7th, 1863, at St. John, New Brunswick — his father is dead — 
 his mother's name Helen S. Ilatheway, now living at Dedham, Massachusetts; in 1878 
 an(f 1879 was atteiuling school :it Deilham, Mass. Left Dedham in the fall (probably 
 Novemt)er) r88o and went to Missoula, Montana. Was some time in tiic employ of a 
 surveyor named Armstrong, whose present whereabouts is unknown. Then entered the 
 employ of Eildy, Hammond Si Co., Cieneral Merchants, Missoula, Montana, rem:iining 
 until .Sc])tend)er, 1881. Then returned to Dedham. Left Deilham in July, 1883 and 
 
 14 
 
came to Rock Cicck, Wyoming; was in liic emijloy of Wcatherhuc 6c 15illin<,',s until 
 January or February, 1S84. Then returned to Dedliani. RL-niaincil in Deilhar.i until 
 September i^tli, 1884, and then came to UniValo and 15i<; Horn, residin',' at the latter 
 place until Fei)ruary 2i.st, 1885, when he was arrested. I am not certain whether he was 
 in the employ of surveyor Armstronj;, or Eddy, Hammond i\: Co. on July 14th, iSSi ; 
 have written 'to Eddy, Hammond tt Co. to 'iind out. The I'ost Connnaiulant, Col. 
 Compton, has put me in possession of all the evidence concerning,' him that the jjovern- 
 ment has. and unless I can find some testimony conclusive as to his occupation and 
 residence on either December 26th, 1879, or July 14th, 18S1, I am very much afraid 
 that he will be convicted and sentenced to the military prison in Kansas for a lon<^ term 
 of years. If vou liave any letters fmm him written in July, 1881, send them to me by 
 return niail. ' 'I'he court o'f inquir\ as to his indentity will be iield j^robably on Saturday 
 of this week : failin<r to establish" his indentity he will be ilisciiarfied from arrest and 
 that will end it. Should his identity be established as the military authorities claim, he 
 will be tried by a (General Coml Martial, now convened, and if iiis story is true we must 
 have witnesses 'from Dedham to prove it. If your son was in Dedhani, December 26th, 
 1879, and attendinj,' school, your evidence would he of the utmost iniportance. 1 l-.avc 
 received no fee from your son (all his ellects have been seized), and in case he sii(nd(i 
 be unable to pay me I shall look to his family for compensation. The charge of deser- 
 tion is not very serious, but the takin<; of the j^overnment horse and pistol is a serious 
 oU'ence and if "he is convicted the punishment will be severe. If lie is unjustly convicted 
 you nuist resort to the President and War Department for a pardon, in which instance 
 there will be a long and tiresome delay and your son will be imprisoned of coinse. 1 there- 
 fore need not urge upon you further the necessity of diligence in the matter and 1 trust 
 yon will give this innnediate attention. I will defend him as counsel before the military 
 courts here, and do my best endeavors to establish his innocence, but in all that I do I must 
 have the hearty co-operation of iiis family and friends, or my ellbrts I fear cannot avail. I 
 have written to his uncle, S. W. llathevvay, 34 School .Street. Boston, Mass. 
 
 With kind regards and my sincere sympatiiy in tliis trouble, I am very truly yours, 
 
 CHARLES H. BURRITT- 
 
 E.XIIIIHT M. 
 
 W.\siii\(;ton, D. C, March 17, 1885. 
 Mu.s. Hiii.iLN S. Ha rin;\v.\> , 
 
 Your telegram rec'd. M\ attention has already been drawn to the case of your son and 
 I have given orders which which will insure justice being done in the matter. 
 
 WM. C. ENDICOTT, Sec'y WV- 
 
 EXHIBIT P. 
 
 W.\u Df.i't., March 35, 1885. 
 
 Hon. (ji:(). I''. I'^dmunds, Senate. 
 
 Arthur Ernest llathevvay, who was held as a tieserter at Fort McKinney, Wyoming, has 
 been ac(|uilte(l by a Court Martial. Particulars of trial not yet known. 
 
 ^ ^ R. C. DRUM. 
 
 EXHIBIT R. 
 
 W. 
 
 Vau Dki'autmknt, Adjutant Gknei{ai.'s Oitick, ) 
 Washington, Marcl. 28th, 1885. ) 
 
 Mu. .S. W. IlATitiiw.vv, Attorney, 
 
 No. 34 School St., Boston, Mass. 
 Sir : — 
 
 In reply to your letter of the 28th ultimo, enclosing papers in the case of Arthur Ernest 
 llathevvay, who was recently arrested as a tieserter from the Army. I have the honor to inform 
 you that the man was acquitted by a General Court Martial ; and that telegraphic instructions 
 for his innnediate release were given by the Department on the 25tii iust. 
 Very respectfully, yovn- obedient servant. 
 
 GEO. D. RLGGLES, 
 
 Ass't Adjutant General.