405 
 

 
 THE 
 
 MARINE CORPS IN MEXICO; 
 
 SETTING FORTH ITS CONDUCT AS 
 
 ESTABLISHED BY TESTIMONY 
 
 A GENERAL COURT MARTIAL, 
 
 CONVENED AT 
 
 BROOKLYN, N. Y., SEPTEMBER, 1852, 
 
 FOB THE TRIAL OF 
 
 FIRST LIEUT. JOHN S. DEVLIN, 
 
 OF THE U. S. MARINE CORPS. 
 
 WASHINGTON : 
 
 PRINTED BY LEMUEL TOWERS. 
 
 1852. 
 
Bwcroh libray 
 
 RECORD. 
 
 NAVY DEPARTMENT, August 10, 1852. 
 
 By virtue of the authority contained in the act of Congress, 
 approved the 23d of April, A. D., 1800, for the better government 
 of the Navy of the United States, a Marine General Court Mar 
 tial is hereby ordered to convene at the Marine Barracks, Brook 
 lyn, on Tuesday the 24th day of August, A. D., 1852, or as soon 
 thereafter as practicable, for the trial of 2d Lieutenant J. H. 
 Strickland, and for such other persons as may be legally brought 
 before it. 
 
 The Court is to be composed of the following named officers 
 any five of whom are empowered to act, viz : 
 
 Capt. ABRAHAM N. BREVOORT, U. S. Marine Corps. 
 
 HENRY B. TYLER, " 
 
 " and Bvt. Maj. GEO. H. TERRETT, 
 " " ARCH. H. GILLISPIE, 
 
 1st Lieut. BEN. E. BROOKE, 
 
 and Bvt. Capt. WM. A.T. MADDOX, ' 
 
 ROBERT TANSILL, 
 1st Lieut. JOHN C. GRAYSON, 
 
 2d Lieut. ISRAEL GREEN. Members. 
 
 Supernumerary AUG. S. NICHOLSON. 
 HENRY WINTER DAVIS, Esq., Judge Advocate. 
 
 JOHN P. KENNEDY, 
 
 Secretary of the Navy. 
 
 Capt. A. N. BREVOORT, 
 
 U. S. Marine Corps, Portsmouth, N. H. 
 
 NAVY DEPARTMENT, August 12, 1852. 
 
 SIR: Brevet Captain Tansill has been relieved from duty as a 
 member of the General Court Martial ordered to convene at 
 Brooklyn on the 24th inst., and Captain J. L. C. Hardy has been 
 appointed a member in his stead. 
 
 I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN P. KENNEDY. 
 Capt. A. N. BREVOORT, 
 
 U. S. Marine Corps, Portsmouth, N. H. 
 
 NAVY DEPARTMENT, August 13, 1852. 
 
 SIR : Second Lieutenant Israel Green has been relieved from 
 duty as a member of the General Court Martial ordered to con- 
 

 vene at Brooklyn on the 24th inst., and 1st Lieutenant Jabez C, 
 Rich has been appointed a member in his stead. 
 
 I am, respectfully, vour obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN P. KENNEDY. 
 Capt. A. N. BREVOORT, 
 
 U. S. Marine Corps, Portsmouth, N. H. 
 
 NAVY YARD, August 26, 1852. 
 
 SIR : The Marine General Court Martial of which you are the 
 presiding officer, is, in compliance with its request, communica 
 ted through the Judge Advocate, hereby authorized to hold its 
 future sittings at the Navy Yard, New York. 
 
 I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN P. KENNEDY. 
 Capt. A. N. BREVOORT, 
 
 U. S. Marine Corps, New York. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, August 31, '1852. 
 
 And the Court having thus closed the trial of the said Lieut. 
 J. H. Strickland, and the Judge Advocate having produced to the 
 Court charges and specifications preferred by the Secretary of the 
 Navy against 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, of the U. S. Marine 
 Corps, who is under arrest by order of the Secretary of the Navy, 
 and ordered for trial, and has reported himself to the Judge Ad 
 vocate to await the orders of the Court in that behalf. 
 
 The Court now proceeds to organize itself for that purpose. 
 
 The Court convened in pursuance of the hereinbefore recited 
 precept and orders of the Secretary of the Navy. Present, the 
 following members, comprising the Court, that is to say : 
 
 Capts. A. N. Brevoort, U. S. Marine Corps, Henry B. Tyler, J. 
 L. C. Hardy; Capt. and Bvt. Majors George H. Terrett, Arch. H. 
 Gillispie; 1st Lieuts. Ben. E. Brooke, Jabez C. Rich; 1st Lieut, 
 and Bvt. Capt. Wm. A. T. Maddox; 1st Lieut. J. C. Grayson, and 
 Bvt. 1st Lieut. Aug. S.Nicholson; Supernumerary, and Henry 
 Winter Davis, Judge Advocate, and 1st Lieut. John S. Devlin, 
 the accused. 
 
 And thereupon the Judge Advocate proceeded to read the pre 
 cept by virtue whereof the Court is convened, as recorded at 
 page 1. And the Judge Advocate also read the letters from the 
 Secretary of the Navy, dated 12th, 13th, and 26th August, 1852, 
 as given at the beginning of this record, assigning Captain J. L. 
 C. Hardy and 1st Lieutenant Jabez C. Rich, for duty as members 
 of this Court, instead of Brevet Captain Tansill and 2d Lieuten 
 ant Israel Green, relieved, and authorizing the Court to hold its 
 future sittings at the Navy Yard, New York. 
 
 And thereupon the accused, John S. Devlin, Lieutenant of the 
 Marine Corps, being called, appears in open Court, and the Judge 
 
Advocate, demands of the accused, 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, 
 whether he has any exception or cause of challenge to make or 
 allege against the said Court, or any member or members thereof, 
 who are now about to be sworn for trial of certain charges and 
 specifications of charges preferred by the Secretary of the Navy 
 against him, the said 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin. 
 
 Whereupon the said 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, makes the fol 
 lowing application to the Court, in writing, which is in the fol 
 lowing words, viz : 
 
 *' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA against JOHN S. DEVLIN, upon charges 
 and specifications preferred against him by the Hon. the Secre 
 tary of the Navy of the United States : 
 
 *' To the honorable the Court Martial assembled 
 
 at the U. S. Navy Yard, Brooklyn: 
 
 " The undersigned respectfully petitions the Court as follows : 
 That he desires to appear by counsel to aid and assist him in his 
 defence, and to cross-examine the witnesses introduced on the 
 part of the Government, and hereby nominate as such my coun 
 sel, Nat. P. Warring, Esq., counsellor-at-law of the city of Brook 
 lyn ; and prays the Court to enter an order or direction to that 
 eftect, JOHN S. DEVLIN." 
 
 BROOKLYN, August 31, 1852. 
 
 The original whereof is annexed, marked No. 1. And there 
 upon the Court orders that Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, have the aid 
 of the counsel selected by him, subject to the usual restrictions in 
 Courts Martial. 
 
 And thereupon the said J. S. Devlin makes the objections to 
 the Court in writing -following which are in the following 
 words, viz : 
 
 The original being marked No. 2* 
 
 The accused before the Court have been sworn, having been 
 called on by the Judge Advocate to say if he challenges any 
 member of the Court, makes the following objections to the Court : 
 
 "First. That the following persons are incompetent to act as 
 members of the Court: R. Tansill, John Grayson, Israel Green, 
 and Aug. S. Nicholson, each and every one of them being inferior 
 in rank to the accused, and incompetent to act as judges. 
 
 "Second. That the order convening the Court is for the trial 
 of Lieutenant J. H. Strickland, and such other persons as may be 
 legally brought before them. The accused cannot be tried by 
 the Court now assembled, until it first appear that he has been 
 legally brought before the Court. 
 
 "If not legally brought before the Court, there is no jurisdic 
 tion to try, and this must affirmatively appear before the Court 
 can proceed, JOHN S. DEVLIN." 
 

 And thereupon the Court is cleared for deliberation upon the 
 objections so propounded. And the Court being opened, the opin 
 ion is announced as follows: That 1st Lieutenant and Brevet 
 Captain Tansill and 2d Lieutenant Green, having been relieved 
 from sitting on the Court, the objection is frivolous, and though 
 1st Lieutenant Grayson and brevet 1st Lieutenant Nicholson, be 
 inferior in rank to the accused, yet the 35th .article for the gov 
 ernment of the Navy, authorizes 0113 half of the members of a 
 General Court Martial to be inferior to the accused, and the ob 
 jections aforesaid to those members is therefore disallowed. 
 
 And as to the second objection touching the jurisdiction of the 
 Court to try the said 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, it appears to 
 this Court that the said J. S. Devlin has been formally arrested 
 by order of the Secretary of the Navy, he having formally re 
 ported himself to the Judge Advocate as awaiting his trial, and 
 has this day appeared in open Court, and the Court has received 
 charges and specifications of charges, prepared by the Secretary 
 of the Navy, whereon the Court is ordered to try the said Lieu 
 tenant J. S. Devlin, as appears from such order hereto annexed, 
 marked No. 10, and such charges and specifications are their suf 
 ficient authority to proceed with the trial of the accused, it is 
 therefore ordered that the said objection be not allowed. And 
 thereupon the accused challenges Brevet Major Geo. H. Terrett, 
 as a member of this Court, and assigns as principal cause of 
 challenge, that he is a material witness necessary for the accused 
 on the trial of the charges and specifications against him. 
 
 And the Court being cleared for deliberation, and having de 
 liberated, and being opened, and the accused and his council being 
 present, the opinion is announced as follows : That the fact that 
 the accused may desire to examine a member of the Court as a 
 witness, though material and necessary, is no ground of challenge, 
 and the objection is therefore disallowed. And thereupon the ac 
 cused further says that he challenges the authority of the Court 
 to proceed further with this cause, because while the Court was 
 closed for deliberation, and in the absence of the accused, the 
 Judge Advocate called into the court room two persons, Lieuten 
 ant Colonel Wm. Dulany and 1st Lieutenant Isaac T. Doughty, 
 for the purpose of making inquiry of them. 
 
 But the Courtis of opinion that the objection is unfounded and 
 disallows the same. The said Court being of opinion that the 
 Judge Advocate may consult with his own witnesses or any other 
 person, without the presence of the accused, without at all im 
 pairing the organization of this Court, and the said persons not 
 having been called on to give any testimony before the Court, but 
 having been called by the Judge Advocate alone for private con 
 versation. 
 
 And thereupon the accused declares that he challenges 1st 
 Lieutenant Jabez C. Rich as a member of this Court, on the 
 same ground on which he abov r e challenged Captain Terrett, and 
 also on other grounds, which he desires time to prepare and state. 
 
And prior to the offering of this challenge, the said 1st Lieu 
 tenant Jabez C. Rich having stated to the Court that he had 
 formerly been so connected with some of the matters about to be 
 investigated, under the charges and specifications in this* case, 
 that he was unwilling to act and sit as a member of the Court, 
 and prayed that he might be permitted to withdraw from the 
 said Court during this cause. 
 
 The Court is cleared for consideration of the matters aforesaid, 
 the accused having in open Court stated that he consents to the 
 withdrawal of Lieutenant Rich if the Court see fit to allow it 
 on his application, and the Court having heard the further de 
 clarations of the said Lieutenant J. C. Rich, that from his pre 
 vious connexion with the transactions, he feared to trust himself 
 in the trial of the charges, and having deliberated on the matter, 
 and the Court being opened, and the accused and his counsel 
 being present, the opinion of the Court is announced as follows: 
 That not making any decision on the challenge of the accused, 
 the Court allows the withdrawal of the said Lieutenant Jabez 
 C. Rich on his application. 
 
 And thereupon Brevet Lieutenant Aug. S. Nicholson sits as a 
 member of this Court. 
 
 And thereupon the accused challenges Lieutenant Aug. S. 
 Nicholson on the ground that his feelings are hostile to the ac 
 cused, they having been on unfriendly terms for three years, and 
 said Lieutenant Nicholson having formed and expressed aii 
 opinion on some of the charges and specifications to be tried, 
 and this exception accused offers to support by witnesses. 
 
 Thereupon the said Lieutenant Aug. S. Nicholson rose and 
 stated to the Court, that h% has not at any time expressed any 
 opinion on any of the charges or specifications to be tried in this 
 cause ; and he further states that while it is true, that he and 
 the accused have not spoken for two or three years, yet that no 
 quarrel has taken place between them, and that he entertains no 
 hostile or unfriendly feelings against the accused, but feels able 
 fully and impartially to try the charges preferred against him, 
 and thereupon the accused declares himself satisfied, and with 
 draws the challenge aforesaid. 
 
 And thereupon, there being no further objection, the Judge Ad 
 vocate proceeds to administer to the President of the Court, and 
 to each member of the Court, the oath prescribed by the 36th 
 article of the rules and regulations for the government of the 
 Navy of the United States, as set forth in the act of Congress of 
 23d April, 1800. Which oath is duly taken by all and each of 
 the said Court, as therein directed to be administered to them. 
 
 And thereupon the President of the Court administered to the 
 Judge advocate the oath prescribed by the 36th article of the 
 rules and regulations aforesaid for the Judge Advocate. Which 
 oath the Judge Advocate formally and duly took as prescribed 
 by the said act of Congress, 23d April, 1800. 
 
 And thereupon the Court being duly organized, adjourned until 
 to-morrow morning, 10 o'clock. 
 
6 
 
 NANY YARD, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK, 
 
 September, I 1852, 11 o'clock. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present : the Presi 
 dent of the Court, the members of the Court as sworn on the 
 31st August, 1852, the Judge advocate, the accused Lieutenant 
 John S. Devlin and his counsel. 
 
 The proceedings of the Court of yesterday are read and ap 
 proved. 
 
 And thereupon the Judge Advocate calls on the said 1st Lieu 
 tenant John 8. Devlin, the accused, to listen to the reading of 
 the charges and specifications of charges preferred against him 
 by the Secretary of the Navy, and the same are read by the 
 Judge Advocate in his presence as follows, viz : 
 
 No. 17. 
 
 Charges, and specifications of charges, prepared by the Secretary 
 of the Navy, against First Lieutenant John S. Devlin, of the 
 United States Marine Corps. 
 
 CHARGE I. 
 Treating with contempt his superior officers. 
 
 Specification. 
 
 In this, that the said John S. Devlin, First Lieutenant in the 
 United States Marine Corps, did write and prepare for publica 
 tion, and did publish or cause to be published, in a newspaper 
 called " The Brooklyn Daily Eagte," published in the City of 
 Brooklyn, in the State of New York, on or about the twelfth day 
 of July, eighteen hundred and fifty-two, a certain written com 
 munication, in a certain part of which wTitten article or com 
 munication were contained certain disrespectful and contemptu 
 ous matters of the tenor and effect following that is to say : 
 
 "Marine Soldiers." 
 
 "Mr. EDITOR: A detachment of fine looking marine soldiers 
 left this city to-day for Norfolk, by the Steamer Roanoke, intended 
 for the guard of the Sloop St. Louis, about to join the Mediter 
 ranean Squadron. The detachment was under the command of 
 that old and faithful officer, Lieutenant Devlin I wish I could 
 say Major, as he has earned that title by bravery in much greater 
 degree than^any officerswho received it. But it is well known 
 that flattery and the favor of the * stay-at-home drones of head 
 quarters/ are much more available than bravery in procuring 
 promotion in the marine corps." 
 
 Which said part of said publication does reflect injuriously 
 upon, and is contemptuous and disrespectful towards, the President 
 of the United States, the Secretary of the Navy at the date of 
 
the publication thereof, and Colonel and Brevet Brigadier Gen 
 eral Archibald Henderson, Commandant of the United States 
 Marine Corps, and tends directly to destroy the respect of the 
 officers of the United States Marine Corps for those officer's, and 
 to bring them into hatred and contempt, to the great injury of 
 the discipline of the said corps. 
 
 CHARGE II. 
 
 The using of provoking and reproachful words respecting other 
 persons of the marine corps of the United States. 
 
 Specification 1. 
 
 In this, that the said First Lieutenant John S. Devlin, of the 
 United States Marine Corps, did write or prepare for publication, 
 and publish or procure to be published, in a certain newspaper 
 called "The Brooklyn Daily Eagle," published in the City of 
 Brooklyn, in the State of New York, on or about the twelfth day 
 of July, eighteen hundred and fifty-two, a certain written com 
 munication, in a certain part whereof, were contained certain 
 provoking and reproachful words respecting other persons of the 
 marine corps of the United States, to the tenor and effect follow 
 ing that is to say : 
 
 "Marine Soldiers" 
 
 "Mr. EDITOR: A detachment of fine looking marine soldiers 
 left this city to-day for Norfolk, by the Steamer Roanoke, intended 
 for the guard of the Sloop St. Louis, about to join the Mediter 
 ranean Squadron. The detachment was under the command of 
 that old and faithful officer, Lieutenant Devlin I wish I could 
 say Major, as he has earned that title by bravery, in much greater 
 degree than many officers who received it. But it is well known 
 that flattery and the favor of the 'stay-at-home drones of head 
 quarters,' are much more available than bravery in procuring 
 promotion in the Marine Corps." 
 
 Which words were and are provoking and reproachful towards 
 the officers at the date thereof stationed at headquarters, to wit : 
 Colonel and Brevel Brigadier General Archibald Henderson, 
 Commandant of the Marine Corps ; Major Parke G. Howie, Ad 
 jutant and Inspector of the United States Marine Corps, and 
 Major Augustus A. Nicholson, Quartermaster of the United 
 States Marine Corps. 
 
 Specification 2. 
 
 In this, that the said First Lieutenant John S. Devlin, of the 
 United States Marine Corps, did write for publication, and pub 
 lish or cause to be published, in a newspaper called " The Brook 
 lyn Daily Eagle," published in the City of Brooklyn, in the State 
 
8 
 
 of New York, on or about the twelfth day of July, eighteen hun 
 dred and fifty-two, a certain written communication in a certain 
 part whereof, were contained certain provoking and reproachful 
 words of the tenor and effect following that is to say : 
 
 "The writer of this article saw the bravery of Lieutenant 
 Devlin put to the test at the storming of Chapultepec, and well 
 did it stand the trial. While other officers halted under fire 
 of the enemy, and sat fat on the ground, under cover of an em 
 bankment topped with Maguay bushes, he waved his sword that 
 was presented to him by his friends of Brooklyn, and told the 
 marines to follow him, and he would lead them. Many of them 
 did bravely follow his example and were wounded or killed ; he 
 himself received a shot through his chin, the scar of which he 
 will bear to the grave, To his credit, be it said, that while an 
 other marine officer who had command of a storming party, sing 
 ularly escaped without a scratch, he, Lieutenant Devlin, who was 
 quartermaster on that occasion, and had to crave permission to 
 leave his wagon train and enter the fight as a volunteer, gained the 
 distinguished credit of being the only marine officer whose blood 
 flowed for his country in the valley of Mexico, except the daunt 
 less Major Twiggs, who was killed at the head of his command." 
 
 Which said words refer to the conduct of Captain and Brevet 
 Major John G. Reynolds, of the United States Marine Corps, who 
 commanded the storming party in the said communication men 
 tioned, at the castle of Chapultepec in Mexico, in September, 
 eighteen hundred and forty-seven, and refer likewise to the con 
 duct of the other officers and marines of the United States Ma 
 rine Corps engaged in the said attack ; and contain false and 
 slanderous imputations of failure or backwardness in the per 
 formance of duty on that occasion, calculated to lead to breaches 
 of the peace on the part of the said officers and marines, so re 
 proachfully and provokingly spoken of. 
 
 CHARGE III. 
 
 Being guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentle 
 man. 
 
 Specification. 
 
 In this, that the said First Lieutenant John S. Devlin, of the 
 United States Marine Corps, did write and prepare for publica 
 tion, and did publish or cause to be published, in a certain news 
 paper called "The Brooklyn Daily Eagle," published in the City 
 of Brooklyn, in the State of New York, on or about the twelfth 
 day of July, eighteen hundred and fifty-two, a certain written 
 communication of the tenor and effect following that is to say : 
 
 "Marine Soldiers." 
 
 "Mr. EDITOR : A detachment of fine looking marine soldiers left 
 this city to-day for Norfolk by the Steamer Roanoke, intended for 
 
9 
 
 the guard of the Sloop St. Louis, about to join the Mediterranean 
 Squadron. The detachment was under the command of that 
 old and faithful officer, Lieut. Devlin I wish I could say Major, 
 as he has earned that title by bravery in a much greater degree 
 than many officers who received it. But it is well known that 
 flattery and the favor of the ' stay-at-home drones of headquar 
 ters,' are much more available than bravery in procuring promo 
 tion in the marine corps. The writer of this article saw the 
 bravery of Lieutenant Devlin put to the test at the storming of 
 Chapultepec, and well did it stand the trial. While other officers 
 halted under the fire of the enemy and s&tflat on the ground, un 
 der cover of an embankment topped with Maguay bushes, he 
 waved his sword that was presented to him by his friends of 
 Brooklyn, and told the marines to follow, and he would lead 
 them. Many of them did bravely follow his example, and were 
 wounded or killed ; he himself received a shot through his chin, 
 the scar of which he will bear to the grave. To his credit, be it 
 said, that while another marine officer who had command of a 
 storming party singularly escaped without a scratch, he, Lieuten 
 ant Devlin, who was quartermaster on that occasion, and had to 
 crave permission to leave his wagon-train to enter the fight as 
 a volunteer, gained the distinguished credit of being the only 
 marine officer whose blood flowed for his country in the valley of 
 Mexico, except the dauntless Major Twiggs, who was killed at 
 the head of his command. As an adopted citizen, I feel a pride 
 in bearing this testimeny to the bravery of Lieutenant Devlin in 
 Mexico, and although not personally acquainted with that officer, 
 I am well acquainted with the facts, and stand prepared to sub 
 stantiate them. 
 
 "AN OBSERVER." 
 
 Which said communication was, on or about the tenth day of 
 July, eighteen hundred and fifty-two, handed by the said First 
 Lieutenant, John S. Devlin, or by his directions, to James Mc- 
 Gann, a Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps stationed 
 at the Marine Barracks, Brooklyn, with the request of the said 
 First Lieutenant, John S. Devlin, that he, the said James Mc- 
 Gann, would copy or cause to be copied the said written commu 
 nication, and that the copy so made should be published in the 
 said newspaper called " The Brooklyn Daily Eagle ;" and the said 
 James McGann did so copy or cause to be copied, and did so con 
 vey or cause to be conveyed to the office of the said newspaper, 
 the said written communication ; and the said written article or 
 communication does falsely and maliciously misstate and misrep 
 resent the operations and conduct of the officers and soldiers of 
 the marine corps engaged in the storming of Chapultepec, in the 
 said article mentioned ; and does falsely and maliciously impute 
 backwardness and dereliction in duty to the said Captain and 
 Brevet Major, John G. Reynolds, the marine officer who had com 
 mand of the storming party in the said article mentioned : and 
 
10 
 
 does falsely and maliciously impute cowardice and dereliction of 
 duty to the officers commanding the marine soldiers, engaged in 
 storming Chapultepec, who, it states, halted under fire of the 
 enemy, and sat flat on the ground under cover of an enbarkment 
 topped with Maguay bushes, while said article falsely lauds and 
 magnifies the conduct and exploits of the writer thereof, the said 
 First Lieutenant, John S. Devlin ; and falsely states the writer 
 thereof to be not personally acquainted with the said First Lieu 
 tenant, John S. Devlin ; and the said First Lieutenant, John S. 
 Devlin, did procure the said James McGann to copy and convey 
 for publication said article reflecting on the conduct of his supe 
 riors in rank, all which acts were unbecoming an officer and a 
 gentleman. 
 
 CHARGE IV. 
 
 The being guilty of scandulous conduct tending to the destruc 
 tion of good morals. 
 
 Specification. 
 
 In this, that the said First Lieutenant, John S. Devlin, of the 
 United States Marine Corps, did write and prepare for publica 
 tion, and did publish or cause to be published, in a certain news 
 paper called " The Brooklyn Daily Eagle," published in the city 
 of Brooklyn, in the State of New York, on or about the twelfth 
 day of July, eighteen hundred and fifty-two, a certain written 
 communication of the tenor and effect following that is to say : 
 
 "Marine Soldiers" 
 
 "Mr. EDITOR: A detachment of fine looking marine soldiers 
 left this city to-day for Norfolk by the Steamer Roanoke, intended 
 for the guard of the Sloop St. Louis, about to join the Mediter 
 ranean Squadron. The detachment was under the command of 
 that old and faithful officer, Lieutenant Devlin I wish I could 
 say Major, as he has earned that title by bravery in much greater 
 degree than many officers who received it. But it is well known 
 that flattery and the favor of the ' stay at-home drones of head 
 quarters/ are much more available than bravery in procuring 
 promotion in the marine corps. The writer of this article saw the 
 bravery of Lieutenant Devlin put to the test at the storming of 
 Chapultepec, and well did it stand the trial. While other offi 
 cers halted under fire of the enemy, and sat flat on the ground, 
 under cover of an embankment topped with Maguay bushes, he 
 waved his sword that was presented to him by his friends of 
 Brooklyn, and told the marines to follow him, and he would lead 
 them. Many of them did bravely follow his example, and were 
 wounded or killed, he himself received a shot through his chin, 
 the scar of which he will bear to the grave. To his credit be it 
 said, that while another marine officer who had command of a 
 storming party singularly escaped without a scratch, he, Lieuten- 
 
11 
 
 t^\ 
 
 ant Devlin, who was quartermaster on that occasion, and had to J 
 crave permission to leave his wagon train to enter the fight as a 
 volunteer, gained the distinguished credit of being the only ma 
 rine officer whose blood flowed for his country in the vaHey of 
 Mexico, except the dauntless Major Twiggs, who was killed at 
 the head of his command. As an adopted citizen, I feel a pride 
 in bearing this testimony to the bravery of Lieutenant Devlin in 
 Mexico, and although not personally acquainted with that officer, 
 I am well acquainted with the facts, and stand prepared to sub- j 
 stantiate them, if- required." 
 
 "AN OBSERVER." 
 
 Which said communication was, on or about the tenth day of 
 July, eighteen hundred and fifty-two, by the said First Lieuten 
 ant, John S. Devlin, or by his directions to James McGann, a 
 Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps stationed at the Ma 
 rine Barracks, Brooklyn, with the request of the said First Lieu 
 tenant John S. Devlin, that the said James McGann would copy 
 or cause to be copied the said written communication, and that 
 the copy thereof should be published in the said newspaper 
 called the " Brooklyn Daily Eagle," and the said James McGann 
 did copy or cause to be copied said article, and did convey or 
 cause to be conveyed to the office of said paper for publication, 
 the said written communication ; and the said article or written 
 communication does falsely and maliciously misstate and misrep 
 resent the operations and conduct of the officers and soldiers of 
 the marine corps engaged in the storming of Chapultepec in said 
 article mentioned : and does falsely and maliciously impute back 
 wardness and dereliction in duty to the said Captain and Brevet 
 Major John G. Reynolds, the marine officer who had command of 
 the storming party of ri;arines in said article mentioned; and 
 does falsely and maliciously impute cowardice and dereliction of 
 duty to the officers commanding the marine soldiers engaged in 
 the storming of Chapultepec, who, it states, halted under the fire 
 of the enemy, and sat flat on the ground under cover of an em 
 bankment topped with Maguay bushes, while said article lauds 
 the conduct of said First Lieutenant Devlin, the writer thereof, 
 and contrasts his conduct injuriously with that of the other offi 
 cers of said marine corps then and there engaged : and does 
 falsely state the writer of said article not to be personally ac 
 quainted with the said First Lieutenant Devlin : and the said 
 First Lieutenant, John S. Devlin, did procure the publication of 
 that false and malicious article reflecting on the commissioned 
 officers of the marine corps superior to said First Lieutenant 
 Devlin, through the instrumentality of said James McGann all 
 which acts were scandalous conduct, tending to the destruction 
 of good morals. 
 
 JOHN P. KENNEDY, 
 
 Secretary of the Navy. 
 
 NAVY DEPARTMENT, August 16, 1852. 
 
12 
 
 The original of which charges and specifications is hereto 
 annexed, marked No. 17, which being read and heard, the Judge 
 Advocate demands of the accused whether he be guilty or not 
 guilty of the said charges and specifications and thereupon the 
 accused tenders an objection to pleading in the following words, 
 viz : The Court being organized, and the charges and specifica 
 tions having been read in the presence and hearing of the ac 
 cused, and he having been arraigned and required to plead to 
 the said charges and specifications, previous to such pleading, 
 now makes the following objection to the Court preceding any 
 further with the trial of the accused. The order convening the 
 Court, dated 10th August, 1852, is an order for the Court to as 
 semble for the trial of 2d Lieutenant J. H. Strickland, " and of 
 such other persons as may be legally brought before it." 
 
 There is no evidence, nor does the record show, that the accus 
 ed is legally brought before the Court. The mere attendance of 
 an officer before a Court, is not evidence "per se" that he is legal 
 ly brought before the Court. 
 
 JOHN S. DEVLIN. 
 
 And the Court being closed for deliberation, and having delib 
 erated, and being opened, the opinion is announced as follows : 
 
 That the objection is disallowed and the accused is required 
 to plead to the said specifications and charges as read to him. 
 
 And thereupon the accused in open Court plead not guilty to 
 the 1st specification of the 1st charge, and not guilty to the 1st 
 charge. 
 
 Not guilty to the 1st specification of the 2d charge. Not 
 guilty to the 2d specification of the 2d charge ; and not guilty to 
 the 2d charge. 
 
 Not guilty to the 1st specification of the 3d charge; and not 
 guilty to the 3d charge. 
 
 Not guilty to the 1st specification of the 4th charge ; and not 
 guilty to the 4th charge. 
 
 And, thereupon, the Court being ready to proceed with the 
 trial of this cause, the Judge Advocate, in support of the issues 
 on his part, offers the following evidence : 
 
 First. The Judge Advocate reads to the Court an agreement of 
 facts with the documents thereto appended made in open Court, 
 between the Judge Advocate and the accused, which is in the 
 following words : 
 
 It is agreed between the Judge Advocate and the accused, in 
 open Court, to admit the following facts, in order to save the 
 time and expense of summoning witnesses. 
 
 First. The accused admits that an article or communication 
 in the words and figures, set forth in the specifications in this 
 cause, was published on the 12th day of July, 1852, in the " Brook 
 lyn Daily Eagle," a newspaper published in the city of Brooklyn, 
 being the same in the specifications mentioned ; which communi 
 cation is in the following words, viz : 
 
13 
 
 " Marine Soldiers" 
 
 " Mr. EDITOR : A detachment of fine looking marine soldiers left 
 the city to-day for Norfolk, by the Steamer Roanoke, intended for 
 the guard of the Sloop St. Louis, about to join the Mediteranean 
 squadron. The detachment was under the command of that old 
 and faithful officer Lieutenant Devlin I wish I could say Major, 
 as he has earned that title by bravery in much grater degree 
 than many officers who received it. But it is well known that 
 flattery and the favor of the stay-at-home drones of headquarters, 
 are much more available than bravery in procuring promotion 
 in the marine corps. The writer of this article saw the bravery 
 of Lieutenant Devlin put to the test at the storming of Chepultepec, 
 and well did it stand the trial. While other officers halted under 
 fire of the enemy and sat flat on the ground, under cover of an 
 embankment topped with Maguay bushes, he waved his sword, 
 that was presented to him by his friends in Brooklyn, and told 
 the marines to follow him and he would lead them. Many of 
 them did bravely follow his example, and were wounded or kill 
 ed, he himself received a shot through his chin, the scar of which 
 he will bear to the grave. To his credit be it said, that while 
 another marine officer, who had command of a storming party, 
 singularly escaped without a scratch, he, Lieutenant Devlin, who 
 was quartermaster on that occasion, and had to crave permission 
 to leave his wagon train to enter the fight as a volunteer, gained 
 the distinguished credit of being the only marine officer whose 
 blood flowed for his country in the Valley of Mexico, except the 
 dauntless Major Twiggs who was killed at the head of his com 
 mand. As an adopted citizen I feel pride in bearing this testi 
 mony to the bravery of Lieutenant Devlin in Mexico, and al 
 though not personally acquainted with that officer, I am well ac 
 quainted with the facts, and stand prepared to substantiate them 
 if required." 
 
 "AN OBSERVER." 
 
 Second, That the papers marked respectively No 18 and 19 
 are in the handwriting of the accused, and hereto annexed, viz : 
 
 No. 18. 
 
 " Mr. EDITOR ; A detachment of fine looking marine soldiers left 
 this city to day for Norfolk, by the Steamer Roanoke, intended 
 for the guard of the Sloop St. Louis, about to join the Mediter- 
 ranian squadron. The detachment was under the command of 
 that old and faithful officer Lieutenant Devlin I wish I could 
 say Major, as he has earned that title by bravery in much greater 
 degree than many officers who received it. But it is well known 
 that flattery, and the favor of the ' stay-at-home drones of head 
 quarters,' are much more available than bravery in procuring 
 promotion in the marine corps. The writer of this article saw 
 the bravery of Lieutenant Devlin put to the test at the storming 
 
14 
 
 of Chapultepec, and well did it stand the trial. While other 
 officers halted under the fire of the enemy and sat flat on the 
 ground, under cover of an embankment topped with Maguay 
 bushes, he waved his sword, that was presented to him by his 
 friends of Brooklyn, and told the marines to follow him and he 
 would lead them. Many of them did bravely follow his example, 
 and were wounded or killed. He himself received a shot through 
 his chin, the scar of which he will bear to the grave. To his credit 
 be it said, that while another Marine officer, who had command 
 of a storming party, singularly escaped without a scratch, he, 
 Lieutenant Devlin, who was quartermaster on this occasion, and 
 had to crave permission to leave his wagon train to enter the 
 fight as a volunteer, gained the distinguished credit of being the 
 only marine officer whose blood flowed for his country in the Valley 
 of Mexico, except the dauntless Major T \viggs, who was killed 
 at the head of his command. As an adopted citizen, I feel a pride 
 in bearing this testimony to the bravery of Lieutenant Devlin in 
 Mexico ; and although not personally acquainted with that officer, 
 I am well acquainted with the facts stated, and stand prepared 
 to substantiate them if required." 
 
 " AN OBSERVER." 
 
 No. 19. 
 
 " NORFOLK, July 12, 1852* 
 
 "DEAR SIR: I had intended to have a few words talk with you 
 on the subject of the small matter I entrusted to your care and 
 prudence. Among what things I had to say was, that you 
 might change the matter, as it was got up in a hurry, in any way 
 you pleased, or you might, in fact, do with it as you pleased, but 
 of course leaving me certainly out of the affair. With this view 
 I hope if you moved in the matter that you securely provided for 
 that object, and that you have destroyed the scrap I gave you as 
 a rough outline for your guidance. I would be also most sorry 
 that you should be known in the matter, but I suppose against 
 all these things your prudence made sufficient provision. I de 
 livered the detachment last night between 8 and 9 o'clock, at the 
 barracks, this morning attended there, and obtained my free 
 papers. About an hour since I went on board the ' Oceola' to 
 leave for Washington at 4 o'clock this evening, but her appear 
 ance determined me to go by way of Baltimore, which I shall do 
 this evening. 
 
 "It will afford me much pleasure to receive a few lines from 
 you in the quickest possible time at Washington, giving all par 
 ticulars how you managed that little affair. 
 
 " I am, dear sir, truly your friend, 
 
 Mr. JAS, MCGANN. " DEVLIN." 
 
 " You will get this letter Wednesday, and I might have one 
 from you on Thursday. I think I will leave Washington on 
 Friday or Saturday. 
 
15 
 
 *' Which letter was postmarked with an official stamp on it 
 and addressed as follows, viz : 
 
 "Mr. JAS. McGANN, 
 " Near Marine Barracks, Brooklyn, N. F." 
 
 Third. That the persons who were stationed at Headquarters 
 of the Marine Corps at the dates in the specifications to the 1st 
 charge, and in the 1st specification to the 2d charge, are 
 correctly stated according to the facts in the said specifications 
 respectively. 
 
 And that Colonel Dulany and 1st Lieutenant Isaac T. Doughty, 
 and 1st Lieutenant John S. Devlin, were the officers attached to 
 the Brooklyn Barracks on the 12th July, 1852. 
 
 All which facts are to be read in evidence as if testified to by 
 competent witnesses. 
 
 And the Judge Advocate produces Major John G. Reynolds, a 
 lawful witness on behalf of the prosecution, who being duly 
 sworn, answers as follows to the following interrogatories: 
 
 1. Question by the Judge Advocate. 
 
 State to what corps you belong, what your rank is in such 
 corps, where you are stationed, and how long you have been so 
 stationed ? 
 
 Ans. I am a Captain and Brevet Major of the Marine 
 Corps. I entered the corps 26th May, 1824, as 2d Lieutenant, I 
 am stationed on the recruiting service in the city of New York. 
 
 2. Question by the same. 
 
 State whether you are acquainted with the accused, how long 
 you have known him, what his rank is in the Marine Corps ? 
 
 Ans. 1 know the accused and have known him since 1824* 
 At first in the capacity of Quarter Master Sergeant. He was 
 then stationed in Washington. Subsequently I have known him 
 as a 2d Lieutenant of Marines. I have never been stationed 
 with him, but he was associated with me on detached service in 
 the war with Mexico. 
 
 3. Question by the same. 
 
 State in what capacity the accused acted when in the Valley 
 of Mexico? 
 
 Ans. On that detached service he was appointed as an acting 
 Assistant Quarter Master and Commissary to the detachment of 
 marines acting with the army in Mexico* 
 
 4. Question by the same. 
 
 State whether you were present, connected, and acting with 
 the division of the United States Army which attacked the Castle 
 of Chepultepec in Mexico; if so, state when such attack and 
 storming took place, and what command you held during such 
 attack and storming ? 
 
 Ans. I was present on the 10th or llth of September, 1847* 
 A select party was called for by the General of the brigade to 
 which I was attached, as a pioneering storming party, to consist 
 
16 
 
 of forty men to be drawn from the three regiments from New 
 York, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina, and six marines from 
 the battalion to which I was attached. The storming took place 
 on the 13th of September, 1847. I commanded the pioneering 
 storming party of forty men. I was selected to command them. 
 The position assigned to me by General Quitman commanding 
 the division, whose order was repeated by General Shields, was 
 as follows : I was ordered to proceed on the Tacubaya road to 
 wards the Castle, and on my route to arm my men with the im 
 plements I had selected the night before ladders, crowbars, and 
 picks. After passing Drum's battery, thirty or fifty paces to shel 
 ter myself and command in the Maguay ditch, till the marine 
 bat f alion should pass me, when I was to follow in their rear. 
 When the battalion should get into line and commence their fire, 
 I was to advance with my party under their fire. 
 
 5. Question by the same. 
 
 State whether, and how you executed these orders ? 
 
 (This question is objected to by the accused as immaterial to 
 the issue, but the objection is disallowed.) 
 
 Ans. I sheltered my command as directed, until the passage 
 of the battalion of marines, after which I followed in their rear, 
 which I did for the distance of several hundred yards, when the 
 battalion of marines was halted, and I halted with them. Dur 
 ing the time (after my joining the rear of the battalion) it was 
 under a heavy and constant fire from the Castle. At the time of 
 the halt, the fire was very severe. I laid two ladders close to 
 gether over the Maguay ditch, and passed over towards the Cas 
 tle, first myself, followed by some seven or eight of my command. 
 Finding it a clear and open field beyond the bushes, which, from 
 my position to the walls of the Castle, extended some two or 
 three hundred yards, and was swept by a field piece of the enemy 
 with grape shot, and by infantry on the wall, I returned with my 
 party, finding it more than useless to attempt an assault in that 
 direction, and determined to wait till the orders governing the 
 battalion should be carried out. 
 
 6. Question by the same. 
 
 , State whether this course was or was not in accordance with 
 the orders of your superior officer, and whether at any time the 
 same was disapproved of by your commanding officer ? 
 , Ans. So far as I am acquainted with them, as received from 
 the lips of Colonel Watson, the commanding officer of the bat 
 talion, this course was according to the orders of the command 
 ing officer. After I had recrossed the ditch, when Major Twiggs 
 was killed, I made application to Colonel Watson to move for 
 ward, and he replied, that he halted by order and could not with 
 out futher orders. 
 
 7. Question by the same. 
 
 How long did you maintain that position, and when did you 
 leave it ? 
 
17 
 
 Ans. We maintained that position some ten minutes, and did 
 foot leave it till the flag was struck upon the Castle. The order 
 was given by Colonel Watson for the troops to shelter, which 
 they did as well as they could, from the exposed position which 
 they held, by means of the Maguay bushes. 
 
 8. Question by the same. 
 
 State what body of troops Colonel -Watson commanded at the 
 time referred to ? 
 
 Ans. Colonel Watson commanded the main body of the 
 marines ; there were several smaller detachments of marines on 
 separate duty. My detachment was not under command of Col. 
 Watson, but I was ordered independently, when the command of 
 Colonel Watson got into position, to advance under their fire. 
 That position was not ever assumed by Colonel Watson's com 
 mand. 
 
 9. Question by the same. 
 
 Would it have been in accordance with your order to have ad 
 vanced without regard to the position of Colonel Watson's com 
 mand? 
 
 Ans. I should have been acting in violation of my orders had 
 I done so ? 
 
 10. Question by the same. ' 
 
 State whether you saw the accused at any, and what time of 
 the day on the 13th of September, at the storming of Chepultepec 
 above referred to, and whether he took any, and what post, in the 
 said attack ; and if any, in what capacity or position he acted ? 
 
 Ans. I saw him after the Castle had surrendered, on my way 
 to the gates of the Castle. I passed him. He was sitting be 
 hind a tree from the Castle, with his hands to his head. I have 
 no knowledge that he had any active position assigned to him 
 officially on that day. 
 
 11. Question by the same. 
 
 Did he command any detachment of marines in any capacity, 
 on that day ? 
 
 Ans. He did not by any assignment. 
 
 12. Question by the same. 
 
 Did he call on any portion of the marines under your com 
 mand, or under the command of Colonel Watson, telling them to 
 follow him and he would lead them, while the command of Wat 
 son was halted, as you have above described ? 
 
 Ans. Not that I know of. I did not see him at any time 
 while the command was halted. If he commanded any marines, 
 they were surreptitiously obtained and not assigned. 
 
 13. Question by the same. 
 
 During the time of the halt above described, did any portion of 
 your, or of Watson's command, break their ranks and irregularly 
 advance without or against orders ? 
 
 Ans. When the command was ordered to shelter, the ranks 
 were already broken. The troops were in column. The ranks 
 were broken. If any passed beyond that point, they passed with- 
 
18 
 
 out orders. None passed that I am aware of. My position was 
 in the rear of the battalion, and I consequently had not an oppor 
 tunity of observing or judging. 
 
 14. Question by the same. 
 
 State what officers of the Marine Corps were wounded during 
 the attack on Chepultepec above mentioned ? 
 
 Ans. Captain Baker and myself are the only two that I per 
 sonally know to have been there wounded. It was said that the 
 accused and Lieutenant Henderson, were likewise wounded there. 
 
 15. Question by the same. 
 
 State whether any, and how many of the marines under your 
 command, were wounded or killed during that attack? 
 
 Ans. There were two of the storming party of marines 
 wounded, and one or two of those drawn from the several regi 
 ments killed, and some seven or eight wounded in the storming 
 party. 
 
 16. Question by the same. 
 
 Was there any other Marine officer having command of a storm 
 ing party on that day beside you ? 
 
 Ans. None other had command of a storming party. 
 
 17. Question by the same. 
 
 At what point of time was Major Twiggs killed ? 
 
 Ans. While the troops were being sheltered, an officer from 
 the gear earne up to where the commanding officer was sheltered, 
 with Colonel Dulany and Major Twiggs, near where I was, and 
 directed us to go ahead. Colonel Watson said he was ordered to 
 halt, and could not move. About ten minutes afterwards Major 
 Twiggs got up from the shelter and stepped to the middle of the 
 road and faced square to the Castle, and said, by God, I am tired ; 
 are those your men, Reynolds, or mine? whereon he immediately 
 received a mortal wound. It was then I asked Watson to move, 
 and he repeated to me what he bad already stated to the officer 
 before mentioned. 
 
 18. Question by the same. 
 
 State whether or no the accused at any time in Mexico after 
 
 
 the storming of the Castle of Chepultepec, made any threat of 
 + publishing anything relative to your conduct on that occasion; 
 and if so, what he said ? 
 
 (The accused objects to the above question as irrelevant under 
 the charges and specifications, there being nothing in them point 
 ing to its subject matter. And the Court having consulted, over 
 rules the objection and order the question to be put and answered.) 
 
 Ans. He did make such a threat. While the Marine battal 
 ion was quartered in the city of Mexico, on the 1st and 5th of 
 October, in the evening, between 8 P. M. and 3 A. M. On both 
 these days the accused made such a speech, in which he de 
 nounced me in the following words : " Where was Captain Rey 
 nolds at the storming of Chepultepec ; he was lying back, and I 
 am bold to say it ; and on my return to my constituents I will 
 publish it in the newspapers ; I will publish it to the world." 
 
19 
 
 19. Question by the same. 
 
 State whether at either time he more particularly pointed out 
 the plan of the intended publication ? 
 
 Ans. He said, when I return to my constituents at Brooklyn. 
 
 20. Question by the same. 
 
 Had the accused ever resided in Brooklyn? 
 
 Ans. He resided at Brooklyn at the time that the marines 
 went to Mexico, and then represented a ward of the city as 
 Alderman. 
 
 21. Question by the same. 
 
 State where General Arch. Henderson, Commandant of the 
 Marine Corps, was stationed during the operations of the Marine 
 Corps in Mexico? 
 
 Ans. At Headquarters, Washington City. 
 
 (It is here agreed between the Judge Advocate and the accused, 
 that on the 12th July, 1852, William A. Graham was Secretary 
 of the Navy of the United States, as evidence in this trial.) 
 
 22. Question by the same. 
 
 State whether or not the accused has for any, and what length 
 of time, been acquainted with you? 
 
 Ans. He has known me ever since 1824, as before stated. 
 
 Which having been read over to the witness, he declared the 
 same correctly recorded. 
 
 The Court adjourned till to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YAED, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK, 
 
 10 O'CLOCK, A. M., September 2, 1852. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, the members of the Court, 
 the Judge Advocate, the accused, and his counsel- 
 
 The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved. 
 
 Thereupon the Judge Advocate proceeds with the examination 
 of Major Reynolds. 
 
 23. Question by the Judge Advocate. 
 
 State where Major Aug. A. Nicholson is now stationed, and 
 where he was during the Mexican war, and what his position is 
 in the Marine Corps? 
 
 Ans. He is stationed at Headquarters at Washington city, 
 and was there stationed during the Mexican war, and was there, 
 and is still Quartermaster of the Marine Corps. 
 
 24. Question by the same. 
 
 State where Major Howie was stationed, and what his duties 
 were at the above period ? 
 
 Ans. He was stationed at Headquarters Washington, during 
 the Mexican war, and is so still, and is Adjutant and Inspector 
 of the Marine Corps. 
 
20 
 
 Which evidence was read over to the witness, and declared by 
 him correct. And here the Judge Advocate closes the examina 
 tion in chief of Major Reynolds. And the accused submits an 
 application in the following words, viz : 
 
 The accused makes the following application to the Court : 
 That, the cross-examination of Brevet Major J. G. Reynolds, be 
 postponed a sufficient time to enable the Court to send to Wash 
 ington, D. C., and procure a copy of the examination of Brevet 
 Major John G. Reynolds' testimony given by him before a Court 
 Martial in the city of Mexico, in the month of November, 1847, 
 upon a trial of the accused before a Court convened about that 
 date in the city of Mexico, and hereby states under oath, that for 
 the purpose of sustaining his rights, defence, and properly cross- 
 examining the said witness on the present trial, the said examina 
 tion and testimony are absolutely necessary, and he prays that 
 such cross-examination be suspended accordingly. 
 
 Sworn to in open Court this ) T Q TYPVT TAT 
 
 day of September, 1852. | 
 
 HENRY WINTER DAVIS. 
 
 And the Court being cleared for deliberation and having de 
 liberated, and being opened, the opinion of the Court is an 
 nounced as follows : 
 
 The Court will allow the accused to postpone for the present 
 the cross-examination of said Major J. G. Reynolds to enable 
 him to send for the record in the application specified, but the 
 Court will not delay the trial for that purpose, and require the 
 prosecution and defense to proceed, and if the record be not here 
 before the other proceedings are closed except the cross-exami 
 nation of said Reynolds, the accused will be required to proceed 
 with such cross-exaination, or to lose the benefit thereof. 
 
 And the Judge Advocate produces Colonel Dulany, a lawful 
 witness produced and duly sworn on behalf of the prosecution, 
 who testifies as follows to the following interrogatories : 
 
 Question by the Judge Advocate. 
 
 Look at the paper marked No. 19, and say when and from 
 whom you received it 1 
 
 Ans. On my return from Washington on the 16th July, 1852, 
 I had travelled all the previous night, and went direct to my 
 quarters and went to bed. On getting up about 2 o'clock, I re 
 ceived under an envelope the official letters of the post ; among 
 them I found an open letter, which I identify as this letter. 
 Finding it an open letter addressed to the Orderly Sergeant of 
 the post I supposed it to be an official paper, and accordidgly 
 read it. I was at a loss to know why he sent it to me, and he 
 said on my asking him, he considered it an act of duty. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 State whether you ever had possession of the paper marked 
 No. 18, and if so, say when and from whom you obtained it 1 
 
21 
 
 Ans. I recognize this as a paper handed me by the Orderly 
 Sergeant of the post, which paper I recognize as in the hand 
 writing of the accused Lieutenant Devlin, and the paper was 
 delivered to me by Sergeant Jas. McGann, the person to 
 whom the letter was directed. Upon my suggestion, after know 
 ing of the purport of the letter, and to what it referred I con 
 sidered it as an act of duty to get possession of the paper No. 
 18, in my capacity of commanding officer of the post ; if it could 
 be done in no other way. 
 
 Here the Judge Advocate closed his examination, and the ac 
 cused propounded the following cross-interrogatories: 
 
 Cross-interrogatory by the accused. 
 
 Cross-question. On what day did you receive paper marked 
 No. 18, and where did you receive it? 
 
 Ans. I received it at corner of Park avenue and some cross 
 street in Brooklyn, one or two days, or a few days after getting 
 the letter No. 19. 
 
 Cross-question by the same. 
 
 Had you had any previous interview with the accused in re- 
 hition to the letter No. 19 and paper No. 18, before you recceived 
 paper No. 18? 
 
 Ans. I had not spoken to Mr. Devlin for some days or weeks 
 prior to my leaving for Washington, to the best of my recollec 
 tion. 
 
 Cross-question by the same. 
 
 When did you leave for Washington? 
 
 Ans. I left, I think, on or about the 6th of July. 
 
 Cross-question by accused. 
 
 Did you, before you received paper No. 18, hold any conversa 
 tion with Sergeant McGann in relation to said paper, if so, 
 when and where was such conversation ? 
 
 Ans. I may have had one or two different conversations with 
 Sergeant McGann and at one or two different places, but when 
 or where exactly I do not recollect. The conversation was, if I 
 recollect aright, respecting Sergeant McGann's connexion with 
 this affair. 
 
 And then the accused closed his cross-examination, and the 
 testimony having been read over to the witness, he declared the 
 same properly recorded. But begs leave to state that, on further 
 reflection, he now recollects that one or two of the conversations 
 above alluded to, with Sergeant McGann, were at the private 
 quarters of the witness. 
 
 James McGann, a lawful witness, produced by the Judge Ad 
 vocate, being duly sworn, answered as follows, to the following 
 interrogatories . 
 
 Question by Judge Advocate. 
 
 Look at paper No. 18 and say whether said paper was ever 
 in your possession, and if so, when, and from whom you received 
 it, and what you were requested to do with it ? 
 
22 
 
 Ans. The paper was once in my possession. I don't recollect 
 the exact date, but I think about the 10th day of July, 1852. 
 And 1 received it from Lieutenant Devlin. I received it on the 
 gang plank of the steamer Roanoke. I think then lying in the 
 city of New York. Lieutenant Devlin said this paper was put 
 into his hand by some person with that party's request that it be 
 published in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle. Lieutenant Devlin 
 asked me if I knew any person, or if I would attend to it 1 and 
 he were both just then a good deal hurried. I had been ordered 
 to turn over to Lieutenant Devlin a detachment of 15 men and 
 one corpora], and I was engaged about it then. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Where were said detachment, and Lieutenant Devlin bound, 
 on board said steamer Roanoke ? 
 
 Ans. To Norfolk, Virginia. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 What did you do with the paper No. 18, handed you by Lieu- 
 tenan Devlin? 
 
 Ans. I put it in my pocket then, I did not look at nor read it 
 till next day, Sunday. When I had read it I copied it. On the 
 following day, Monday, morning, I handed it to a young man, I 
 believe the foreman in the office of the Brooklyn Daily Eagl e 
 I had not been requested to copy it. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Look at paper No. 19 and say whether said paper was ever 
 in your possession, if so, when you received it, and how? 
 
 Ans. I have not a distinct recollection of the date, but the 
 paper has been in my possession. I received it, to the best of 
 my recollection, on the morning of the 15th day of July, 1852. 
 It came through the post-office. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 State what you did with letter No. 19, when you received it. 
 
 Ans. I kept it in my pocket, or some where, for 1 think a couple 
 of days ; I then handed it with other papers to the wife of 
 Lieutenant Colonel Dulany. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Where was Lieutenant Colonel Dulany at the time you so 
 handed it to his wife ? 
 
 Ans. I am not certain that he was in the house at that mo 
 ment, but I knew he had returned from Washington that morn 
 ing, and it was for the purpose of being handed to Colonel 
 Dulany that I handed the paper to his wife. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 State to what matter the said letter marked No. 19 related, 
 to what other paper or rough draft, given you by said Lieute 
 nant Devlin ? 
 
 To this question the accused objects, but .the question is or 
 dered to be put by the Court. 
 
 Ans. Speaking conscientiously, I must say I dont know to what 
 other paper than paper No. 18 it could refer; but I cannot say 
 that it does refer to that. 
 
23 
 
 And then the Judge Advocate closes the examination of Ser 
 geant McGann, and rests his cause. And the accused declining 
 to cross-examine the said witness, and the said evidence having 
 been read over to the witness, he declares the same to be correct 
 ly recorded. 
 
 And thereupon the Judge Aduacate calls the accused to proceed 
 with his case, and produce his testimony if any he desires to offer 
 to sustain the issues joined on his part. 
 
 And thereupon the accused appealed to the Court for time to 
 prepare his case till to-morrow morning, in order that he and the 
 Judge Advocate may settle the interrogatories for the examina 
 tion of General A. Henderson and John Roache, witnesses at 
 the Marine Barracks, Washington, D. C., to save the time and 
 expense of obtaining their presence for the accused ; and there 
 upon the Court, for that purpose, agrees to allow of the delay, 
 and adjourns till to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK, 
 
 September 3, 1852, 10 o'clock, a. m. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present, the Eresi- 
 dent of the Court, the members of the Court, the Judge Advocate, 
 the accused and his counsel. 
 
 The proceedings of yesterday were read over and approved. 
 And thereupon the Judge Advocate calls upon the accused to 
 proceed with his defense. 
 
 And the accused, to sustain the issue on his part, produces and 
 reads in evidence to the Court, the part of the agreement between 
 him and the Judge Advocate relating to his testimony, the other 
 part having been read yesterday, the part now read being as fol 
 lows, viz : 
 
 And the Judge Advocate on his part admits that Captain Silas 
 Casey, if present, would testify to the effect of the contents of 
 the printed paper hereto annexed and marked A, purporting to be 
 a paper from the said Casey, dated 22d September, 1847, which 
 statement is to be read o>i behalf of the accused, subject to all 
 legal exceptions as to the competency of the contents, as if said 
 Casey were present, the accused waiving the right to call said 
 Casey as a witness in this case. 
 
 The Judge Advocate also admits, the printed paper marked B, 
 as evidence of the order it purports to contain, subject to legal 
 exceptions to the relevancy and competency of the matter thereof. 
 HENRY WINTER DAVIS, Judge Advocate, 
 J. S. DEVLIN. 
 
 The original whereof is hereto annexed marked No. 20, to 
 gether with the said papers therein referred to. 
 
 And the accused further read the said papers in the said agree 
 ment mentioned as annexed hereto, and marked A and B, which 
 are in the following words, viz : 
 
24 
 
 A. 
 
 MEXICO, September 23, 1847. 
 
 SIR : I have just received your communication of the 22d inst.,, 
 and although still confined to my bed, will endeavor to comply 
 with the request of the General. On the 12th inst., I was placed 
 in command of 250 picked men and volunteers of the 2d division 
 of regulars, for the purpose of forming a storming party in the 
 attack on the castle of Chepultepec. By direction of the Gen- 
 eral-in-chief, I reported (on the evening of the 12th) to Major 
 General Quitman for orders. I organized the party in six divi 
 sions, corresponding to the different regimental detachments of 
 which it was composed. The first division was commanded by 
 Captain Roberts, of the rifles, the second by Lieutenant Haskins, 
 1st artillery, the third by Captain Dobbins, of the 3d infantry, 
 the 4th by Lieutenant Hill, of the 4th artillery, the 5th by Lieu 
 tenant Wescott, of the 2d infantry, and the 61 h by Captain Paul, 
 of the 7th infantry. Having been provided with scaling ladders, 
 crowbars, powder bags, and all the necessary implements, on the 
 morning of the 13th inst., as directed by the General, I followed 
 the marines in the direction of the castle. Soon after passing 
 Captain Drum's battery we entered a ditch on the left side of the 
 road, the enemy opening quite a brisk fire, but which from our 
 position did no injury. In a short time the marines in our 
 front halted ; on perceiving which, I ordered the storming party 
 to take the road and pass them. My orders were promptly 
 obeyed, and they gallantly advanced up the road under a galling 
 and destructive fire. On arriving near the causeway, I received 
 a wound in the abdomen, by which I was unable further to con 
 duct the operations of the storming party. The command de 
 volved on Captain Paul, of the 7th regiment, next to me in rank. 
 After being wounded, I managed to reach a rancho on the road 
 side, a short distance in our rear, where I remained until the ac 
 tion was over, using what strength remained to me in urging for 
 ward the stragglers who stopped there. 
 
 From the peculiar and desperate nature of the service, and 
 their zealous co-operation, I would recommend the officers com 
 posing the storming party, to the special notice of the Command 
 ing-general. Captain Roberts, by his position as commanding the 
 leading division of the column, more particularly attracted my 
 attention. From what I myself witnessed, and from the testi 
 mony of others, he, by his activity, zeal, and gallantry, merits the 
 highest praise. 
 
 S. CASEY, 
 2d Infantry, Commanding Storming Party. 
 
 F. N. PAGE, Assistand Adjutant General. 
 
25 
 
 B. 
 
 GENERAL ORDER, No. 3. 
 
 WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, 
 
 Washington, January 28, 1847. 
 
 The following regulations has been received from the War 
 Department : 
 
 WAR DEPARTMENT, January 28, 1847. 
 
 The President of the United States directs that paragraph 650, 
 of the general regulations for the army, established on the 1st 
 March, 1825, and not included among those published January 
 25, 1841, be now republished, and that its observance as a part 
 of the general regulations be strictly enjoined upon the army. 
 By order of the President, 
 
 W. L. MARCY, Secretary of War. 
 
 The following is the paragraph of the general regulations for 
 the army established the 1st March, 1825, referred to above: 
 
 650. Private letters or reports relative to military marches and 
 operations, are frequently mischievous in their designs, and always 
 disgraceful to the army. They are, therefore, strictly forbidden : 
 and any officer found guilty of making such reports for publica 
 tion, without special permission, or of placing the writing beyond 
 his control, so that it finds its way to the press, within one month 
 after the termination of the campaign to which it relates, shall 
 be dismissed from the service. 
 
 By order, 
 
 W. G. FREEMAN, 
 
 Assistant Adjutant General. 
 
 The accused further proves by the certificate of Richard Mc- 
 Sherry, Passed Assistant Surgeon, U. S. Navy, and acting Surgeon 
 ot Marines, that Lieutenant J. S. Devlin received a severe gun 
 shot through the chin at the storming of Chepultepec, which is 
 admitted by the Judge Advocate, and is in the following words : 
 
 "MARINE BARRACKS, CITY OF MEXICO, Feb. 8, 1848. 
 " I hereby certify that Lieutenant John S. Devlin, U. S. Marine 
 Corps, received a severe gunshot wound through the chin at the 
 storming of Chepultepec. 
 
 "The wound was obstinate in healing, until a ball, or a portion 
 of one, perhaps one of the split balls said to be used by the Mexi 
 cans, was extracted. 
 
 "After this the healing went on rapidly. Mr. Devlin was then 
 Acting Commissary and Quartermaster, and on that occasion was 
 a volunteer aid of General Shields. 
 
 "RICHARD McSHERRY, 
 "Passed Asst. Surg. U. S. N., and Acting Surg. of Marines." 
 
26 
 
 The accused further reads the following agreement between 
 the acaused and the Judge Advocate, in open Court : 
 
 "It is agreed that the accused was tried on specification 2d 
 and 4th, of charge 2d, which are hereto annexed, and sentenced 
 to be cashiered, which was remitted by the President, and that 
 the said specifications, charge, and finding, may be read in evi 
 dence from the printed statement, as if the record were produced. 
 
 "HENRY WINTER DAVIS, 
 "J. D." 
 
 And the specifications and charge and finding, an/1 sentence re 
 ferred to in the agreement, are read to the Court, and are in the 
 following words, viz : 
 
 CHARGE II. 
 Conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. 
 
 Specification 2. 
 
 In this that 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, of the Marine Corps, 
 did on or about the 22d September, 1847, while in a state of in 
 toxication, in the presence of several, and in the hearing of many 
 of the officers quartered with the regiment in the city of Mexico, 
 use disrespectful and reproachful language in regard to Captain 
 J. G. Reynolds of said corps, in reference to the storming of Che- 
 pultepec, in the following words, viz ; " Where was Captain 
 Reynolds, with his storming party ; he was lying back ; I am bold 
 in the assertion ; I am not afraid to say it, gentlemen ; and when 
 I go back to Brooklyn I will make it known in the public news 
 papers," or words to that effect, and thus continued his harrangue 
 for a long time, the whole discourse reflecting upon the charac 
 ter and reputation of the said Captain Reynolds. 
 
 Specification 4. 
 
 In this that 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, of the Marine Corps, 
 did on or about the 1st of October, 1847, at the Marine quarters 
 in the city of Mexico, use reproachful and disrespectful language 
 directed to the said Captain Reynolds, by name, to wit : " Where 
 was Captain Reynolds, with his storming party, at Chepultepec ; 
 he was lying back ; I am bold in the assertion ; I am not afraid to 
 say it, gentlemen, and when I go back to Brooklyn I will make it 
 known in the public newspapers," or words to that effect. 
 
 The Court found the accused as follows: Of the 2d specifica 
 tion to the 2d charge, Guilty, except the words " while in a state 
 of intoxication," and the whole of the 4th specification to the 2d 
 charge, Guilty. 
 
 The Court, does sentence him, 1st Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, of 
 the U. S. Marine Corps, to be cashiered. 
 
 Which paper, printed, is annexed, marked No. 22. 
 
27 
 
 And the accused produced to the Court Lieutenant Jabez C. 
 Rich, a witness on his behalf, who being duly sworn, testifies as 
 follows, to the following interrogatories : 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 Are you acquainted with the accused, and how long have you 
 known him? 
 
 Ans. I am acquainted with him, and have known him since 
 1847. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Were you present at the storming of Chepultepec ; and if so, 
 did you see the accused there ? 
 
 Ans. I was, and did see him there. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Look at the annexed diagram of the said battle, and say if you 
 saw Major Reynolds there, and designate the place where you 
 saw him, on the diagram, and the particular situation in which 
 he was placed. The diagram is marked No. 31 ? 
 
 Ans. I did see Major Reynolds on that day, and his position 
 when I saw him, was at the point marked by a dot on the plat, 
 between A. and M. As to his particular situation, after a period 
 of five years, I cannot distinctly recollect. My impression is, that 
 when I last saw him he was sitting down on the roadside. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Did you on the occasion referred to see any officers sitting or 
 lying on the ground; if you did, state the particular place on the 
 diagram, and the names of the officers, and the time ? 
 
 Ans. I cannot state particularly the time ; I had just been re 
 lieved from guard. It was just before the assault was made ; 
 about eight or nine o'clock in the morning. Certainly not later 
 than that. In passing around the plan designated by the dot on 
 the diagram, I saw sitting on the ground, Colonel Watson, com 
 mandant of the regiment, Major Dulany, and perhaps some 
 others not now recollected. Perhaps I had better state that at 
 this time the whole command were sitting down, and doing so 
 by command, to protect themselves from a very heavy fire from 
 the enemy. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Did you see Major Reynolds there ? 
 
 Ans. My impression is that Major Reynolds was there, but in 
 the rear of Colonel Watson and Major Dulany, some twenty or 
 thirty feet, and near where Major Twiggs was shot, which was 
 near the left of the regiment. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 How do you hnow the fact that the command was sitting 
 down by orders ? 
 
 Ans. Only by common report. It was perfectly understood 
 throughout the army that the signal for our assault should be 
 the cessation of our cannonade on the castle. I sat down myself, 
 and made my men sit down because I understood it to be the 
 order. 
 
28 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Was Major Reynolds sitting or standing when you saw him on 
 the occasion referred to? 
 
 Ans. I cannot say ; I think sitting. In fact I am very sure he was. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 How near the Maguay bushes were the officers you saw sitting 
 down? 
 
 Ans. I suppose some two or three feet as near as you could 
 get to the embankment. They formed some shelter so far as 
 sight was concerned, but no shelter against shot; my orderly 
 sergeant was shot right alongside of me ; he was not killed. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Where did you see the accused upon the occasion referred to 
 in the former questions ? 
 
 Ans. I saw him near the Castle gate after the point of time at 
 which I had seen the other officers sitting down. It was just 
 during the storming by our party. General Pillow having al 
 ready entered the castle from the other side. I had passed 
 around the point marked by the dot, with some few men part 
 of my company. As I passed I saw the accused considerably 
 ahead of myself and of any of the marines, waving his sword, 
 and with a red handkerchief in his hand at the same time. 
 How long he had been round there I don't know. I moved my 
 self because I had been informed by Captain Casey, the aid of 
 General Shields, that the orders were to advance. I make this 
 explanation in order to show how I came to advance without 
 orders from the commandant of the regiment. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Do you know of any other marine officer besides accused, 
 whose blood flowed by a wound received in the field of battle in 
 the valley of Mexico; and if so, state the name of such officer? 
 
 Ans. I do not. Lieutenant Baker reported himself as wound 
 ed to the surgeon, but whether wounded or not, I don't know. 
 We all know, of course, Twiggs was killed. 
 
 Qestion by same. 
 
 How far distant was the marine battalion from the Castle of 
 Chapultepec when it surrrendered, and where was the storming 
 party of forty pioneers and Captain Reynolds at that time ? 
 
 Ans. I can't be exact, but they were within musket shot. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Did or did not the accused, in company with you, call on Gen 
 eral Shields at the village of Coyacan, in Mexico, two or three 
 days before the attack on Chepultepec, and request General 
 Shields to assign him for duty in the storming 'party then being 
 organized ? 
 
 Ans. Yes, but I don't think it was two or three days ; it was 
 but one day before. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 How do you know that Lieutenant Baker reported himself 
 wounded, and in what part of his body did he report himself 
 wounded, and did his wound prevent him from doing duty ? 
 
29 
 
 Ans. He was on the official list of killed and Wounded. It 
 did not prevent him from doing duty. 
 Question by same. 
 
 Did you or did you not know, or was it generally understood, 
 that the signal you have just alluded to of the cannon ceasing to 
 play on the Castle, was intended as a signal for marching in the 
 morning from Tacubaya or near Drum's battery, and not as a 
 signal to remain in shelter at the advanced point where the ma 
 rines halted and sat down? 
 
 Ans. I understood it to be the signal to advance to the attack. 
 I never saw the order. I got this order from my commanding 
 officer as above described. I was on the left of the column, in 
 command of my company under Colonel Watson, on the morning 
 of the attack, after I was relieved from guard. 
 Question by same 
 
 Do you know whether Major Reynolds was wounded at Che* 
 pultepec ; if so, say how and when ? 
 
 Ans. 1 do not know. Not to my knowledge. 
 Question by same. 
 
 Was or was not Captain Reynolds^ with his pioneer storming 
 party, immediately present, assisting at the reduction of Chepul* 
 tepee; and if so, state the nature and extent of the assistance 
 he rendered ? 
 
 Ans. I presume he was present, but the Castle was taken long 
 before any of the marines had anything to do with the storming 
 of it. 
 
 The accused offers the following question, viz : Do you not 
 know it was a common subject of remark at the time, among the 
 officers immediately after the battle of Chepultepec, that Cap 
 tain, but now Major Reynolds, with his pioneer party, remained 
 in the rear during the action ? 
 
 To which question the Judge Advocate objects, and it is not 
 allowed to be put by the Court. 
 Question by same. 
 
 Did the marines, during the action, fire on the enemy while 
 the officers were in shelter ; if yea, by whose order and in what 
 order of battle ? 
 
 Ans. The marines fired on the enemy, and by order of their 
 commanding officers, I suppose. They were sitting on the ground, 
 or lying down; loaded their guns, and got up and fired as fast as 
 they could, the battalion being in line. 
 Question by same. 
 
 Was you present taking an active part as an officer of marines 
 during the whole time the battalion of marines was in Mexico, 
 and to the end of hostilities? 
 
 Ans. I landed with the marines, and staid for three or four 
 
 months after the surrender of the city, but left before the treaty* 
 
 Here the accused closed the examination of the witness, and 
 
 the Judge Advocate propounded the following cross-interroga 1 - 
 
 tories : 
 
30 
 
 Cross-question by Judge Advocate. 
 
 At what hour were you relieved from guard on the morning 
 of the 13th September, 1847, and what officer relieved you? 
 
 Ans. I was not relieved by any one. The guards were broken 
 up and the men retired to their various regiments. I was acting 
 while on guard under Major Dulany, who was filed officer of the 
 day. 
 
 Cross-questioned by same. 
 
 Had Captain Casey the command of any particular body of 
 troops in the attack upon Chepultepec ? 
 
 Ans. I am not aware that he had. I know him to be an aid 
 of one of the Generals. 
 
 Question by Captain H. B. Tyler, a member of the Court. 
 
 State whether Captain Casey gave you the order to advance 
 when he was passing with his command ; or when, and in what 
 capacity ? 
 
 Ans. I have already stated that I am not aware that he had 
 any command. When I first saw him, it was when the marine 
 battalion were sitting or lying on the ground under the bushes. 
 He came from the rear, and of course reached me before reach 
 ing any other marine officer, 1 being on the left, and said to me 
 what are you doing here, why do you not advance? I replied to 
 him, I have no orders, he said, I give you the order, sir, and I am 
 empowered to order everybody to advance. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Were you not part of Colonel Watson's command, and if yea, 
 how could you pass beyond Colonel Watson's command, Captain 
 Casey being junior to Colonel Watson? 
 
 Ans. I can simply state it was in the excitement of an action ; 
 we had been under fire for four or five hours, and it was done 
 under the excitement of the moment. 
 
 Question by Judge Advocate. 
 
 State whether Captain Casey was moving alone at the time of 
 the order as an aid, or had he any men following under his order? 
 
 Ans. He was alone at the time the order was given. The 
 New York regiment, however, was then passing on towards the 
 Castle, or had already passed. Some of the men in passing said, 
 why don't you corne along, and laughed. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 State what the reply of General Shields was to Lieutenant 
 Devlin's request to be assigned to duty with the storming party 
 referred to? 
 
 Ans. I do not know what the General did upon the request. 
 He was acting during the action as aid to General Shields. 
 
 Question by the Court. 
 
 Did the New York regiment pass the whole force of the ma 
 rines, or did it only pass the left of the line where you were ? 
 
 Ans. They did pass the whole marine battalion to the right, 
 and then turned to the left towards the Castle. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
31 
 
 Please look at the paper now shown you, signed by you ap 
 parently, and say if it be signed by you, and if so, state what 
 your recollection of the facts relative to the passing of the ma 
 rine battalion above referred to is after reading it, the paper is 
 marked No. 28 ? 
 
 Ans. It is signed by me. My recollection of the facts is the 
 same as above stated. I refer particularly in that paper to Casey's 
 claiming to have passed them with a storming party. It refers 
 also to the time when the marines were in action, and not to the 
 time when they were lying down before they were ordered into 
 action. After they were in action they were passed by no troops. 
 
 And here the examination is closed, and the testimony being 
 read to the witness he declares the same to be correct. 
 
 And Captain Terrett being duly sworn on behalf of the accused, 
 testifies as follows to the following interrogatories 
 
 Question by accused. 
 
 State if you are acquainted with the accused, and how long 
 you have known him. and whether you were with him in Mexico 
 at the storming of Chepultepec, and what position he held in the 
 marine corps then, and what was the position of said Lieutenant 
 Devlin, and Major Reynolds, and Colonel Dulany, and other officers 
 at the storming, by reference to the diogram ; and state the 
 whole operations of the said Lieutenant Devlin, and of said Major 
 Reynolds, during such storming of Chepultepec, and whether 
 either of them, and any others were wounded then ? 
 
 Ans. I am acquainted with him, and have known him some 
 20 or 2*2 years. 1 was with him in Mexico at that time. He 
 was acting Assistant Quartermaster and Commissary of the mar 
 ine battalion. When we were ordered to proceed on the Tacubaya 
 road towards the Castle, Lieutenant Devlin was with me till I had 
 nearly reached the angle of the road. When Lieutenant Devlin 
 disappeared ahead of me, he had his sword drawn, waving it over 
 his head and cheering. When I reached the angle marked by 
 the dot on the diagram, I halted on receipt of an order to that 
 effect from the rear, and ordered my men to sit or kneel, as I un 
 derstood it to be ordered. I did not see him again during the day ; 
 to the best of my recollection he had not command ot any men 
 when he disappeared. A few minutes after halting, I cast my 
 eyes to the rear, and there I saw Major Twiggs fall, about 15 
 or 20 paces in my rear. I then observed Major Reynolds, Colonel 
 Watson, and other officers, I suppose 25 or 30 paces in my rear 
 in a sitting or kneeling position. My time was so taken up by 
 the command, my position being on the extreme right, that I did 
 not again observe the party in my rear. The men were some 
 what straggling owing to the rapidity of the advance. Lieuten 
 ant Devlin's cheering may have operated to encourage the men. 
 Major Reynolds and the other officers were some five or six paces 
 from the Maguay bushes. I was separated from my battalion, 
 when the rest of them entered the Castle, I, with a party of men 
 was in pursuit of the enemy on the San Cosine road, and did not 
 
32 
 
 enter the Castle. During the halt at the angle of the road, 
 troops, of what command I don't know, marched up to near my 
 position at the corner of the road, filed to the right away from 
 the Castle and broke. 
 
 The paper handed to the witness for the purpose of showing a 
 different statement made by him at a former period^ relative to 
 the passing of the marine battalion by other troops on the occa 
 sion referred to, (and for that purpose only, the paper is marked 
 No. 26,) and is in the following words, viz : 
 
 CITY OF* MEXICO, March 14, 1848. 
 
 Mr. EDITOR : A statement has been published by Captain Casey, 
 2d Regiment of Infantry, which, whether wilfully or hot, reflects 
 most seriously upon the corps to which we have the honor to be^ 
 long. The facts of the case are simply these: The marines, in 
 stead of halting, were halted by order of General Quit man, and 
 so far from not being ready to advance, did, at the attack, move 
 Without orders, the officers of companies having much difficulty 
 in restraining the men from making a rush. 
 
 The marines were not passed by any body of men. Certainly 
 not by the storming party of Captain Casey, nor were they in the 
 back ground at any time during the storming of Chepultepec* 
 The statement and inference of Captain Cnsey to the contrary 
 notwithstanding: all who were there acted nobly, and we cannot 
 conceve why Captain Casey should make a public attack upon a 
 body of men, any one of whose officers are ready and willing to 
 defend their oWn honor and that of the corps. And many of 
 whom have seen more of actual service, both at home and 
 abroad, than Captain Casey and those who are willing to give 
 Credit to his statements ever dreamed of. 
 
 It may be that this statement has been caused by the accusa^ 
 tion, totally unfounded, which was made by an officer against 
 another officer, having command of a special storming party at* 
 tached to Major Twiggs* light battalion. It has been proved 
 most positively that that officer was where he was ordered to be. 
 
 We are yet to learn by what rule of military discipline, a junior 
 officer presumes to criticise the action or motives of his superiors, 
 ignorant as he must necessarily be, of his orders or motives of ac 
 tion. The officer commanding the special storming party, composed 
 of forty men, made up from the volunteer division under General 
 Quitman, to wit: New York, 2d Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 
 and a small portion from our own little battalion, receiving orders 
 from General Quitman and Shields. This officer has ever been 
 taught to obey orders under any and every contingency. 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servants, 
 
 (Signed) JNO. GEO. REYNOLDS, Capt. Marines. 
 
 GEO. H. TERRETT, 
 J. C. RICH, 1st Lieut. 
 W. L. YOUNG, " 
 
 Which being read, the Court adjourned till to*morrow morning 
 at 10 o'clock* 
 
S3 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK, 
 
 10 O'CLOCK, September 4, 1862. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, the Judge Advocate, the 
 Bccused, and his counsel. 
 
 The proceedings of yesterday were read. 
 
 Whereupon the accused objects to the same as improperly con 
 taining the paper put into Lieutenant Rich's hands, and signed 
 by him for the purpose stated, in the following words, viz : 
 
 The counsel for the accused objects to the record of yesterday's 
 proceedings as read this morning. 
 
 The paper read by the Judge Advocate forms no part of the 
 proceedings. The paper having been put into his hands, not as 
 evidence, but as a memoranda for the purpose of refreshing the 
 witness's recollection, which was not read. It cannot be used for 
 the purpose of impeaching the witness, because the statement con 
 tained in the paper is immaterial, more especially as he subse 
 quently explained it, and the memoranda is not in witness's hand 
 writing, nor is there any evidence he ever read it, 
 
 A memoranda made by the witness cotemporaneous with the 
 transaction, and so made under his direction at the time, may be 
 looked at by the witness to refresh his memory, but not for the 
 purpose of making the memoranda evidence, or even part of the 
 record, the accused asks to have that part of the record expunged. 
 And this is asked immediately after the record of yesterday. 
 
 But the Court considered the paper aforesaid properly included 
 in the proceedings of yesterday, for the purpose therein stated, 
 <and approved of th-e proceedings as recorded. 
 
 And thereupon the accused proceeds with the examination of 
 Captain Terrett, who proceeds in his answers to this question, by 
 the accused, put to him yesterday. 
 
 Ans. I know nothing of Captain Reynolds being wounded. I 
 only heard that Captain Baker was, but never saw the wound. 
 Lieutenant Henderson was very near me on the San Cosme Road, 
 and a ball passed through his pantaloons and scratched the skin, 
 thereby causing him to jerk his foot up. Twiggs, of course, was 
 killed. 
 
 The accused offers the following question: 
 
 Have you ever heard from any source whatever, previous to 
 the present time, that Major Reynolds was wounded at the at 
 tack on Chepultepec; and if so, from what source, and when did 
 you hear thereof ? 
 
 Which question being objected to by the Judge Advocate as 
 calling for hearsay evidence, is excluded by the Court. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 In what position was Captain Reynolds and his command, 
 when the Castle was taken, and by whom was it taken ? 
 
 Ans. I cannot state his position, because I don't know when, 
 or by whom, the Castle was taken. 
 
34 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 What was the nature and magnitude of the battery that held 
 the marines in check. How many guns did it mount, and their 
 size. Did the marines on the right advance within range, or did 
 they halt at the place mentioned, till the battery was silenced 
 and the Castle captured? 
 
 Ans. There were some two or three guns, I think, and within 
 range less than two hundred yards ; not in direct range. My 
 impression is they ceased firing just as we advanced. One of 
 these guns was captured by Lieutenant Simms, Henderson, and 
 myself, in pursuit of a large body of the enemy. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 When did accused leave the city of Mexico, and where has he 
 been stationed since? 
 
 Ans. The accused, Lieutenant Rich, and myself, left about the 
 20th March, 1848. I can't say exactly where stationed since. 
 
 Question by the Court. 
 
 You say the accused waived his sword and cheered the strag- 
 ling troops. State for the information of the Court the kind of 
 sword he waived, and at what particular point, by reference to the 
 diagram, the cheers were given, as also to what regiment the 
 straglers belonged? 
 
 Ans. The particular kind of sword I can't say. The cheers 
 were given from the time the firing commenced till I lost sight of 
 him. There were no other troops but marines, near the place, and 
 there were no troops in advance of me. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Were the marines, at the storming of Chepultepec, passed by 
 the New York regiment, or any other troops, in the direction of 
 the Castle? 1 
 
 Ans. They were not. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Did the battalion of marines direct its fire against the Castle, 
 or against a body of troops stationed upon the ramparts, or on 
 either side of the Castle ? 
 
 Ans. Skirmishers were sent out from the Castle. I directed 
 my men to fire when they could get a good opportunity, and only 
 then. No fire was directed on the Castle itself by me. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Did you hear any order given by the accused, as aid of General 
 Shields, at the time you state he waved his sword ? 
 
 Ans. Not as the aid of General Shields ? 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Did the marines, at any time, assume a position such as would 
 warrant a party of forty men to advance under the protection of 
 their fire, for the purpose of the operations of mining and scaling ? 
 
 Ans. I think not ; they were three hundred yards off, or more. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 During your association with the accused in Mexico, did he at 
 any time show you a sword, and state it was presented to him by 
 some citizens of Brooklyn. 
 
35 
 
 Ans. He did not. 
 
 Question by the accused relative to a question by the Court. 
 
 On the field of battle is it usual for an aid to state the capacity 
 in which an order is given ? 
 
 Ans. It is usual, of course, for them to say from whom the 
 order comes, unless known to the person ordered to be such aid. 
 
 Question by the Court. 
 
 Had you any official information of the appointment of the ac 
 cused as aid to General Shields? 
 
 Ans. I had none. 
 
 Question by the Court. 
 
 In what capacity was Captain Casey on the day of the storm 
 ing of Chepultepec ? 
 
 Ans. Of my own knowledge I don't know. 
 
 Question by the Court. 
 
 Did Lieutenant Devlin disappear around the corner, as de 
 scribed by you, before or after the men were ordered to cover, and 
 did he at any time after they were under cover, call to the 
 marines and tell them to follow him and he would lead them? 
 
 Ans. As I before stated, I lost sight of him before we halted. 
 I did not hear him at any time making such a call, nor did I see 
 him again after I halted my men. 
 
 Additional question by accused. 
 
 Did not the accused pass the marines while the men were un 
 der cover ; and if yea, did not he, as he so passed, wave his sword 
 .and cheer the men ? 
 
 Ans. He had passed them before they were under cover, he 
 having joined me immediately after we had gotten on the Tacu- 
 baya road. He joined me in no capacity. He seemed to be ac 
 ting by himself alone. I lost sight of him just as I halted my 
 men. I did not see him afterwards, but I did not see him turn the 
 angle ; it was near the angle, and I suppose he must have 
 turned it. 
 
 And here the examination of Captain Terrett is closed, and his 
 testimony, as read to him, he declares correctly recorded. 
 
 George Bender, a lawful witness, produced by the accused, 
 being duly sworn, testifies as follows, to the following interroga 
 tories : 
 
 Were you at the attack on Chepultepec ; and if so, in what ca 
 pacity ; in what company, and under what officer, and are you 
 acquainted with the accused, and how long have you known him? 
 
 Ans. I then belonged to Captain Terrett's company, a private. 
 Have known the accused since 21st April, 1847. I was present 
 at Chepultepec. I saw Lieutenant Devlin there when he was 
 wounded ; it was on the road from Tacubaya to Chepultepec, 
 near the bend of the road, just beyond where Captain Terrett's 
 men were stationed. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 State the position of the marine officers and soldiers at the time 
 when you saw Lieutenant Devlin wounded. Were they sitting, 
 standing, or lying down, and under any and what shelter ? 
 
86 
 
 Ans. Some standing up, some walking along the ditch, and 
 some sitting down, and also several officers of the army and vol 
 unteers were there acting in the same way. They came up the 
 same road as we. I did not see them under any shelter; they 
 were standing in the ditch. There was a Sort of breastwork 
 along the ditch. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Where were Major Reynolds and Colonel Dulany, and in what 
 position were they at, and immediately before the time of Lieu 
 tenant Devlin being wounded ? 
 
 Ans. They were in the ditch ; I can't say whether sitting or 
 standing ; there were Maguay bushes along the top of the breast 
 work along the ditch. 
 
 Here the accused closed his examination, and the Court put the 
 following questions : 
 
 Was your battalion exposed to the fire of the enemy at the time 
 you state you saw Lieutenant Devlin ; if so, was it from artillery 
 or musketry, or both ? 
 
 Ans. They were exposed to musketry and artillery. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 How far were you from Lieutenant Devlin when you saw him 
 wounded? 
 
 Ans. About ten or twelve paces. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Was there any water in the ditch you mention, and how deep 
 was it ? 
 
 Ans. In some parts there was water. It was, say, three or 
 four feet deep. It was deeper on the other side. Some parts of 
 the ditch was dry. 
 
 And here the examination was closed, and the testimony hav 
 ing been read over to the witness, he declares the same correctly 
 recorded. 
 
 And here, on application of the accused, who states two of his 
 witnesses are absent, and he cannot, without disadvantage, ex 
 amine Colonel Dulany before those witnesses, Arnold and Lomas, 
 and prays the Court to adjourn to Monday, to enable him to get 
 them, which the Court agreed to do, with the declaration that if 
 the witnesses be not here on Monday, they having been already 
 summoned, no further delay will be allowed. 
 
 It is agreed as evidence? that the accused returned from Mexico 
 in April, 1848, and remained in Brooklyn till April, 1849, when he 
 went to the Pacific on a cruise, remaining two years and ten 
 months, and returned to Washington, where he remained two 
 months, and on the 29th March, 1852, joined the Brooklyn station. 
 
 The Court adjourned till Monday morning, 10 o'clock. 
 
3T 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK, 
 
 September 0, 1852, 10 o'clock. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment; present, the* Presi 
 dent of the Court, the members of the Court, the Judge Advocate, 
 the accused, and his counsel. 
 
 The proceedings of Saturday, the 4th September, are read and 
 approved. 
 
 And whereupon the accused produces Samuel G. Arnold, a 
 lawful witness, who being duly sworn, testifies as follows to the 
 following questions: 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 Are you editor of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, and were you so 
 on the 1st day of July, 1852, and thence till the present time? 
 
 Ans. I was, and am so editor. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Are you acquainted with John Lomas, and if yea, about how 
 long have you known him, and in what capacity, and are you 
 acquainted with his handwriting ? 
 
 Ans. I am acquainted with him, and have been probably three 
 or four years. I know his handwriting so far as to tell it with 
 considerable probability ; I think I know it. I have known him 
 chiefly as a writer for papers, sometimes for one and sometimes 
 another. 
 
 The following question having been offered by the accused in 
 the following words, viz : Was the paper, now produced, and 
 shown to you, and marked No. 23, left at your office for publica 
 tion ; if yea, about what time was it left, and was it or not pub 
 lished, and how long was it at your office, and whether any note 
 accompanied the same? 
 
 The same, with the document therein referred to, is objected 
 to by the Judge Advocate; and the Court being of the opinion 
 that the question is improper and the paper is not only not evi 
 dence in this "Court, but impertinent and disrespectful in its lan 
 guage, refuse to allow said question to be put. The paper re 
 ferred to being hereunto annexed, and marked No. 23. 
 
 The following question was offered by the accused, viz: 
 
 Was any private note from any person handed in at your of 
 fice, accompanying a communication in relation to, or explana 
 tory to the paper No. 18, signed "An Observer? " 
 
 Which being objected to by the Judge Advocate, was ordered 
 not to be put by the Court. 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 Look at paper No. 24, and say in whose handwriting the 
 same is ? 
 
 Ans. I dont think I could say in whose handwriting it is. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Do you recognize the person now pointed out to you as Major 
 John G. Reynolds, U. S. M. C. ? 
 
 Ans. This is the person I have understood to be Major Rey 
 nolds, who called at my office. 
 
38 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 About what time did he call at your office, and for what pur 
 pose did he say he called? 
 
 Ans. He called to inquire in relation to an article which had 
 appeared in the Eagle, under the signature of " Observer," No. 
 18, perhaps a week after the publication of it. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 When he called, to whom did you refer him for information as 
 to said article ? 
 
 Ans. I dont remember the name of the person who left the 
 article, but I referred him to that person, who was known to some 
 men about the office. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Who is the foreman in the office of the Eagle, and did you or 
 not refer Major Reynolds to him, when he called in relation to 
 the article? 
 
 Ans. I referred him to the foreman, to whom the person was 
 known. The foreman's name was Patrick Campbell. 
 
 And now the accused closed the examination of the witness, 
 and the evidence having been read over to him he declares the 
 same correctly recorded. 
 
 John Lomas, a witness produced by and on behalf of the ac 
 cused, being duly sworn testifies as follows, in reply to the follow 
 ing interrogatories : 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 What is your business and employment, and how long have 
 you been engaged in that business? 
 
 Ans. I am an attorney at law, and a correspondent for the pub 
 lic press, and have been for 20 years. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Are you acquainted with Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, and how 
 long have you known him ? 
 
 Ans. I have known him ten or twelve years, intimately. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Look at paper No. 24, and say in whose handwriting it is? 
 
 Ans. It is in my handwriting. It is unlike my ordinary hand 
 writing, but it is in my handwriting, it was written very hastily. 
 
 The paper No. 24, referred to in the said answer, is in the fol 
 lowing words, viz : 
 
 Paper No. 24 is omitted, being the original of paper No. 18, 
 signed "An .Observer" in the handwriting of Mr. Lomas. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 What did you do with paper No. 24 ? 
 
 Ans. I gave it to Mr. Devlin, but when I don't know. It was 
 after my return from Washington, which was in the latter part 
 of May or first June, and I went back early in July. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 At whose instigation, if any one's, did you write said paper ? 
 
 Ans. I wrote it of my own volition, after a conversation with 
 some gentlemen in reference to the Mexican campaign, and I 
 
39 
 
 will add with a view of placing Mr. Devlin in a just position be 
 fore the country, and also, I had no desire at the time to reflect 
 unfavorably on any particular individual connected with the-pub- 
 lic service or otherwise. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 At the time you handed the paper No. 24 to the accused, where 
 was he and on what business was he engaged ? 
 
 Ans. If I recollect aright it was in the city of New York, in 
 Broadway. What he was about I don't know, except that he was 
 going out of town somewhere. 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 Was he on public or private business at the time? 
 
 Ans. I don't know that. He was then going to leave New York. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 What did you tell the accused, if any thing, when you handed 
 the paper No. 24 to him ? 
 
 Ans. Our interview was a brief one, I recollect saying to him, 
 that the manuscript was written on both sides, and if it was prin 
 ted it would be necessary to have it copied, and I explained to 
 him the reason why the compositors required manuscript to be 
 written on one side only, on his asking the reason. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 What did you understand at the time from the accused was 
 the purpose of his going out of town ? 
 
 Ans. I don't recollect any conversation as to his intended ab 
 sence from New York at all. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 From what source did you get the information on which you 
 predicated the article ? 
 
 Ans. I must respectfully decline answering that, for the reasons 
 that the communicMtions to me at the time were considered to 
 be strictly confidential. I have no hesitation in saying, however, 
 that the material allegations there were gotten from Lieutenant 
 Devlin himself, in conversations at different times about his own 
 actions and about the Mexican campaign. Those conversations 
 at the time of their occurreuce however had no reference to any 
 publication at that time, and were looked upon as simple narra 
 tions in which I and others naturally felt an interest. 
 
 The accused offers the following questions : 
 
 Look at the paper No. 23 now shown you and say who is the 
 author of it, which question being objected to by the Judge 
 Advocate, was ruled out by the Conrt. 
 
 The accused thereupon offers the following paper to the Court 
 which is in the following words, viz: 
 
 No. 23. 
 
 To the Editor of the Eagle : 
 
 DEAR SIR : On the 12th ultimo you were kind enough to pub 
 lish a communication of mine under the head of " MARINE SOL- 
 
40 
 
 DIERS," which I intended to be complimentary to a gentleman in 
 the service of the United States) as one of the best and bravest 
 and most efficient officers) whom I have for several years known, 
 and for whom I entertain high and unfeigned regard and es 
 teem. That brief and unpretending letter had reference to the 
 meritorious services of Lieutenant Devlin, of this city, during 
 the Mexican war. Not one iota of the remarks I wrote on the 
 occasion alluded to, not a single syllable would I consent to be 
 expunged therefrom, because I have the most conclusive evidence 
 in my possession of the entire truth of all and every allegation 
 made. I learn, with equal surprise and regret, that the just 
 adulation I humbly sought to pay to a chivalrous and daring sol 
 dier, has excited the spleen, the env}*, and the jealousy of some 
 of his fellow officers to such an extent that they (or one of them 
 at least) have determined to subject him to the ordeal of a trial 
 by Court-martial, in the vague and false supposition that he insti 
 gated, or was the author of the publication which you did me 
 the honor to insert in the Eagle. 
 
 It would, perhaps, be the best and the severest rebuke which 
 those persons could suffer, w r ere they permitted to proceed with 
 their absurd and certainly suicidal scheme ; because, in all pro 
 bability, they might be subjected to a scrutiny in relation to their 
 own acts, during the Mexican campaign, which would render 
 them, in the estimation of the community, and of the world, 
 other than the heroes which they have hitherto flippantly and 
 fraudulently claimed to be. Let the individuals referred to place 
 themselves in the unfortunate position if they have the folly and 
 the temerity to do so. 1 most solemnly aver that they neither 
 can nor shall escape unscathed. Whilst with the fullest confi 
 dence I can promise that the laurels so bravely won by Lieute 
 nant Devlin shall no longer be withheld from him to be placed 
 upon the craven foreheads of mere pretenders. 
 
 OBSERVER. 
 
 BROOKLYN, August 16, 1852. 
 
 The accused now proposes to show by the witness on the 
 stand, that paper No. 23 was delivered at the office of the Eagle 
 by him, together with a private note to the Editor requesting him 
 to publish the same, and to prove that such request for publica 
 tion of No. 23 was made before charges were preferred against 
 the accused, and before Major Reynolds called at the office of 
 the Eagle, which the Court refuses to allow to be proved, as not 
 appearing to be relevant to any issue in the cause. 
 
 And here the accused closes the examination of the witness, 
 and the Judge advocate propounds the following interrogatories : 
 
 Cross question by Judge Advocate. 
 
 State where you reside, and how long you have so resided, and 
 whether you have at that place pursued your business of attor- 
 
41 
 
 ney and correspondent, or writer of the public press continuously 
 during that time? 
 
 Ans. I reside now in New York, on Broadway, and have so re 
 sided since 5th August, 1852. Previously to that time for 13 or 
 14 years I resided in Brooklyn. My business office is now and 
 has been for about three years, in the office of the Sheriff of this 
 county. I have been continuously occupied as above described 
 in Brooklyn and Albany occasionally, during the legislation, and 
 in Washington, when called upon, during the above period. I 
 have been engaged necessarily in my vocation all that time ex 
 cept when sick. 
 
 Question by the Court. 
 
 Are you a regular or constant correspondent of the Brooklyn 
 Eagle? 
 
 Ans. I have no connexion with the Brooklyn Eagle, nor have 
 ever had. Several years ago, I think, I occasionally reported 
 some local news for the Eagle. 
 
 And here the examination of the witness was closed by the 
 Judge Advocate, and by the Court, and the evidence having been 
 read over to the witness, he declares the same to be corectly 
 recorded. 
 
 Lieutenant Colonel Dulany, a lawful witness, called by ac 
 cused, being duly sworn, answers as follows to the following in 
 terrogatories. 
 
 Q,ustion by accused. 
 
 Previously to the present charges being preferred against the 
 accused, did you have any conversation with Major Reynolds in 
 which he expressed any feeling relative to the accused ? 
 
 Ans. I had a conversation with Major Reynolds in conse 
 quence of an official letter from him relative to Sergeant Mc- 
 Gann, in connexion with the publication out of which the charges 
 grew, but he then expressed no feelings either for or against the 
 accused to my recollection. 
 
 Here the examination of witness was closed, and the testi 
 mony having been read over to him he declares the same cor 
 rectly recorded. 
 
 It is agreed that Lieutenant Devlin left New York for Norfolk 
 in the Roanoke on the 10th of July, 1852. 
 
 The Court then here recals Lieutenant Rich and propounds to 
 him the following question to which he responds as follows, viz : 
 
 Look on the paper No. 26 shown you yesterday and state 
 whether or not your are the author of it, and if it be in whole or 
 in part in your handwritting, or in whose handwriting is it ? 
 
 Ans. 1 am not the author of the letter, and although the hand 
 writing appears familiar to me, I am not able to say whose the 
 latter part is. But I should suppose the former part to be in the 
 handwritting of Major Reynolds. The latter part is not in my 
 handwritting. My name appended to is in my handwriting. 
 
 Question by Court. 
 
 When you saw Lieutenant Devlin cheering and waving his 
 
42 
 
 sword, were you at the head of your company, or acting singly 
 in the charge at Chepultepec ? 
 
 Ans. At the time specified a part of my company were with 
 me, and Captain Terrett was at the same time near. 
 
 And here the examination is closed and the testimony being 
 read over to the witness, he declares the same correctly recorded. 
 
 The accused further called Matthew Riordan a lawful winess, 
 who, being duly sworn, testifies as follows to the following ques 
 tions: 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 State whether you know Lieutenant Devlin, and whether any 
 sw r ord was ever presented to him ; and was the accused, at the 
 time of such presentation, holding any, and what, municipal 
 office in Brooklyn ? 
 
 Ans. I know Lieutenant Devlin, ,nd a sword was presented to 
 him by citizens of Brooklyn, when he was an Alderman of the 
 Second Ward, in 1847 or 1848, a short time before he went to 
 Mexico. I have known him for some twelve or fourteen years. 
 
 Here the examination of witness was closed, and his testimony 
 being read over to him, he declares the same to be correctly re 
 corded. 
 
 Lieutenant B. E. Brooke, a lawful witness produced by the ac 
 cused, being duly sworn, testifies as follows to the following 
 interrogatories : 
 
 Question by accused. 
 
 Do you know the accused ; look at the paper now shown to 
 you, No. 25, and say where and when it was in your possession, 
 and what you know relative to the contents of it? 
 
 Ans. When I was at Boston station, among Colonel Watson's 
 effects after his decease, the paper, No. 25, (among others relat 
 ing to the marine corps,) was handed to me by Mrs. Watson. 
 She said I could do with it as I pleased. I delivered the paper to 
 Lieutenant Devlin, who asked me to certify the fact of my re 
 ceipt of the letter. I think it to be in Lieutenant Devlin's hand 
 writing. The said paper, No. 25, is as follows, viz : 
 
 No. 25. 
 
 SAN AUGUSTINE, MEXICO, August 19, 1847. 
 
 COLONEL : The regiment under your command being about to 
 engage the enemy, and by resigning the staff appointment of 
 acting assisting quartermaster, which I have the pleasure of 
 holding under you, I will succeed to the command of a company, 
 which will be more in consonance with my feelings. 
 
 Therefore, I respectfully tender to you the resignation of my 
 staff appointment. 
 
 I am, Colonel, respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN. S DEVLIN, 
 
 Act. Ass't Qurtermaster U. S. Marine Regiment. 
 Colonel S. E. WATSON, 
 
 Com'g Marine Regiment, Mexico. 
 
43 
 
 Here the testimony of the witness being closed, and having 
 been read over to him, he declared the same to be correctly re 
 corded. 
 
 The accused further offers the following extract from the offi 
 cial report of Lieutenant Colonel Wm. Dulany, relative to the 
 conduct of the accused in Mexico at the storming of Chepul- 
 tepec, which he is allowed to read as evidence by the Judge Ad 
 vocate, and is in the following words, viz : 
 
 "On the morning of the battle of Contreras, 19th August, 
 1847, when it was hourly expected the marines would be called 
 into action, Lieutenant Devlin tendered to Lieutenant Colonel 
 Watson a resignation of his staff appointment, in order to take 
 command of a company in the field, then commanded by an offi 
 cer his junior, which was not accepted. Again, on the 7th Sep 
 tember, a similar resignation was tendered, and again refused by 
 Lieutenant Colonel Watson, on the ground of not having any 
 other officer so familiar with staff duties. From this decision he 
 appealed to General Shields, which appeal was made in my pre 
 sence, and proved unsuccessful. The General sustained the de 
 cision on the ground of military usage, but on my representing 
 to him the anxiety of Lieutenant Devlin for active service, he 
 appointed him a volunteer aid-de-camp, in which capacity he 
 served in the attack on Chepultepec, where he was for a time 
 separated from the General. Subsequently he was engaged and 
 wounded in the attack, while advancing on the enemies' battery. 
 After the Castle was carried he proceeded, though severely 
 wounded, to the Gareta de Beleu, where he was engaged in the 
 attack on that place, and was among the first to enter the gates 
 of the enemies' capitol. 
 
 WM. DULANY, 
 Major United States Marine Corps. 
 
 And thereupon the accused proceeds with the cross-examina 
 tion of Major Reynolds, the witness produced, sworn and ex 
 amined heretofore on the part of the prosecution. 
 
 Cross-question by accused. 
 
 When were you made a Brevet Major ? 
 
 Ans. On the 3d of March, 1848, I think. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 What particular detached service was the accused on with 
 you in Mexico? 
 
 Ans. In the early part of the campaign he was Quartermaster 
 and Commissionary a short time he acted as aid to General 
 Shields. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 Who was the General who called for the select party of which 
 you speak of in your direct examination, for the storming of Che 
 pultepec ? 
 
 Ans. General Shields, after approbation of General Quitman. 
 
 Cross question by same. 
 
44 
 
 Were the orders to you relative to the storming of Chepulte- 
 pec verbal or in writing? 
 
 Ans. Verbal. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 State particularly what those orders were, and from whom 
 you received them? 
 
 Ans. The orders were that I proceed on the Tacubaya road, fur 
 nish my men with the implements selected the night before, and 
 after passing Drum's battery thirty or fifty paces, to shelter my 
 self and party in the ditch and wait the passing of the Marines, and 
 to follow in their rear, and when they were in line and com 
 menced firing, to advance under their fire. These orders were 
 given by General Quitman, and repeated by General Shields, 
 they being together, and my party forming in the road at the 
 time. 
 
 This question I was not asked at the former trial in Mexico. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 State the name of the officer under you in the storming party ? 
 
 Ans. Only Lieutenant Hare, of the Pennsylvania volunteers. 
 The name of the marine soldiers I don't know. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 Did you observe the New York regiment passing you when 
 under shelter? 
 
 Ans. No, sir ; I did not. 
 
 Here Pat.'k Campbell was introduced, and being sworn, duly 
 answers as follows t the following interrogatories : 
 
 Question by accused. 
 
 Are you foreman in the Eagle office, and do you recollect any 
 person calling at the office for the paper, No. 18, and did you de 
 liver it to him, and did he state who sent him for it? 
 
 Ans. I am foreman, I don't know that any one called for this 
 paper; as far as my recollection serves me, this does not appear 
 to be the writing. 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Do you recognise any person present as calling for a commu 
 nication of the nature of the paper No. 18? 
 
 Ans. Yes, sir, (pointing to Major Reynolds,) that is the gentle 
 man. I believe the publication was on the 13th ; he called about 
 two weeks after. 
 
 Here the examination v/as closed, and the testimony having 
 been read over to the witness, he declares the same correct. 
 
 And the Court then proceeded with the examination of Major 
 Reynolds. 
 
 Question by accused. 
 
 During the period the accused was with you in Mexico, did 
 you have any quarrel with him? 
 
 Ans. Yes, sir ; a very severe one. 
 
 Here the Court adjourned till to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
45 
 * 
 
 NAVY YARD, 
 10 o'clock a. m., September 7, 1852. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present : the Presi 
 dent, the members of the Court, the Judge Advocate, the accused 
 and his counsel* 
 
 The proceedings of yesterday Were read and approved* The 
 accused thereupon proceeds with the cross-examination of Major. 
 J. G. Reynolds. 
 
 Cross-question by accused. 
 
 Have you from that time to the present been on unfriendly 
 terms with Lieutenant Devlin ? 
 
 Ans. Yes, sir ; I have. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 State the origin and cause of such quarrel or difficulty. 
 
 Ans. It grew out of improper language of the accused, irri" 
 properly influencing my son. The time was the 6th September, 
 1847, at San Augustine, Mexico* 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 Did you prefer charges against accused on which he was tried 
 in Mexico? 
 
 Ans* I did ; and appeared as a witness. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 State who were present at the time you heard Lieutenant 
 Devlin address his friends, as you have above testified, in his 
 room in Mexico? 
 
 Ans. Different officers at different times, Colonel Dulany, Cap 
 tain Terrett, Lieutenant Rich, Lieutenant Norvell, Henderson, 
 Sims, and Nicholson. 
 
 Cross*question by same* 
 
 State the whole address as you recollect it, and the eircum- 
 stances under which it was made ? 
 
 Ans. On the first time the accused was drunk, and harangued, 
 when Colonel Dulany and Captain Terrett w r ere present, as I have 
 above repeated, and Colonel Delany ordered him to keep silent. 
 He said he would not be gagged* and continued, he said he 
 might leave the room and go to hell* 
 
 He said more than I have repeated which I can't now remem 
 ber. It continued a long time, he evidently knew I was in hear 
 ing. This was on the 19th September. 
 
 After, on the 1st and 5th October, he repeated what I have 
 above stated, and Colonel Dulany being present, did not interfere. 
 I heard Lieutenant Rich caution him. It is impossible to state 
 the particulars further. There was whiskey in Lieutenant Dev 
 lin's room on the occasions. I don't know whether there was 
 any eating going on. I heard them asking each other to drink. 
 On every occasion of his addresses he was drunk. 
 
 Accused offered the following question, viz : 
 
 Did any person present at the address make any reply, and if 
 so, assenting or dissenting ? 
 
46 
 
 Which being objected to by the Judge Advocate as irrelevant, 
 the address being in evidence only to show an intent to make a 
 publication, relative to its subject matter, on Lieutenant Devlin's 
 return, and the Court order it not to be put. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 Did Lieutenant Hare or any other officer of the pioneering 
 party under you, decline to stay with you under shelter, and ad 
 vance round the angle of the road which protected you ? 
 
 Ans. After the flag was down a general rush was made. The 
 battalion was severed. Lieutenant Hare with my party and the 
 rest of the marines made the rush round the angle referred to 
 on the Castle gate. Lieutenant Hare did not refuse to stay. 
 
 Cross-question by accused. 
 
 What troops carried the left battery, that kept you in check, 
 and where was the accused at the time ? 
 
 Ans. I am not aware what troops carried it, I only saw the 
 accused sitting behind a tree. 
 . Cross-question by same. 
 
 Will you state the nature of your wound, and did you report 
 yourself to the surgeon or ever show him your wound ? 
 
 Ans. I was wounded in the outside of my left ankle. It was 
 slight. I showed it to Dr. McSherry, who afterwards told me 
 Colonel Dulany refused to notice my wound, unless he would ex 
 amine it. It would only make unnecessary uneasiness to my 
 family to report it, so I asked him not to report. I saw Lieuten 
 ant Baker's wound, it was a contusion. He refused to show it 
 because Colonel Dulany had made the demand. This I state in. 
 justice to Lieutenant Baker. My wound was received I suppose 
 while under cover. It was rather a burn than a wound, and I 
 did not notice it until I was on the road to the Belin gate. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 State what you mean when you say " if any marines followed 
 Lieutenant Devlin he must have obtained them surreptitiously?" 
 
 Ans. Taking them from the command of other officers. 
 
 Cross-question. 
 
 Did or did not you and Colonel Dulany agree on reporting the 
 accused to Headquarters, and urging a prosecution against him 
 by Court-Martial ; and did you or not go to Washington, exhibit 
 the paper No. 18, obtained from Sergant McGann, and urge Bre 
 vet Brigader General Henderson, and the Navy Department to 
 proceed to try or prosecute the accused ? 
 
 Ans. No, sir. I wrote an official note to Colonel Dulany. I 
 also went to Washington for the double purpose of getting a fur 
 lough for my son, and getting an investigation as to the author 
 ship of the paper No. 18. I sent paper No. 18 to Headquarters 
 in an official letter. 
 
 There was no understanding bstween myself and Colonel Du 
 lany about a prosecution. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 Did you, while in Mexico, stride Lieutenant Devlin in the face 
 with you fist ? 
 
47 
 
 Ans. I did. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 Have you or not on several occasions threatened to have the 
 accused cashiered ; and have you not stated that you would not 
 rest satisfied until you got him out of the corps, or words to that 
 effect ? 
 
 Ans. Never. On the contrary I have always acted on the de 
 fensive, defending my reputation. 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 State when and where you first saw paper No. 1 8, and had 
 you seen the publication previously ? 
 
 Ans. I saw the paper on the 1 9th July, at the office of the Eagle. 
 I heard of it at my rendezvous from one of my Sergants, a day 
 or two after the publication. I did not see the original paper, 
 No. 18, till after my return from Washington, in August. On 
 the 19th, I asked for the editor. I saw him and told him that 
 the paper reflected on me and others injuriously that I had, four 
 years ago, cautioned him about publishing articles reflecting on 
 me. He said he did not observe the piece, or consider it as re 
 flecting on any one, but referred me to the other editor, who re 
 ferred me to the foreman of the office, who answered evasively. 
 He was ordered to speak out if he knew. He said it was an offi 
 cer of the marine corps. I threatened to prosecute the editor if 
 I did not get the author. He then mentioned McGann as having 
 brought it, and said it had been taken from the office the day 
 previously. 
 
 Cross-question. 
 
 While at the office was paper No. 23 shown you, or did any 
 person offer to show it to you or state its contents ? 
 
 Ans. No paper was shown me, nor was there any offer to show 
 me any paper or letter touching the matter. On the contrary, I 
 asked the editor to publish a statement that he did not mean to 
 reflect on any officer by the piece published, but he declined to 
 do so. 
 
 The accused offers the following question for the purpose of 
 contradicting the witness, viz : On your examination as a wit 
 ness on the trial of the accused in Mexico, did you testify that 
 the words used by the accused were as follows, viz : " Where 
 was Captain Reynolds with his storming party ? He was lying 
 back, he was not doing his duty. I am free to say it. I will 
 make it known on my return to my home in Brooklyn, by pub 
 lishing it to the world ?" 
 
 And the Judge Advocate here hands to the witness the record 
 of his testimony, procured and produced by the accused, for the 
 purpose of contradicting the witness, agreed to be used as if the 
 whole record were produced, to which the accused objects, but 
 the Court allows the witness to examine the record of his testi 
 mony before replying to the question. 
 
 Ans. Five years or nearly so have elapsed since that answer 
 was given. I have had no minutes to keep the exact language 
 
48 
 
 used by the accused in my mind* But I intended on the testi* 
 mony given before the Court to use the precise language. If it 
 differed, it was intended to be equivalent of the former language. 
 Inasmuch as it is on the record, I presume I must have used the 
 language imputed in the question. 
 
 Cross-question by accused. 
 
 Was the language used by the accused with reference to you, 
 on the 22d September, and 1st October, 1847, in Mexico, the same 
 on both occasions? 
 
 Ans. They were all of a denunciatory kind, and the language 
 was pretty generally of the same character. 
 
 Cross-question by same. 
 
 Were the same expressions used in reference to the mode and 
 manner in which he would publish you on his return ? 
 
 Ans. I believe he made use of pretty much the same words* 
 They were tending to the same point, and in substance the same* 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Upon both occasions, did he make use of the words " publish 
 to the world and make it known through the public newspapers?'* 
 
 Ans. I think he did on both occasions. I am certain he did on 
 the last occasion. 
 
 Cross question by Same. 
 
 Did you in Mexico testify to any conversation on the 5th of 
 October? 
 
 Ans> I don't remember testifying to any conversation in Mexico 
 on the 5th October. But I do so now? 
 
 Question by same. 
 
 Did Lieutenant Devlin demand satisfaction of you for the 
 blow you gave him in Mexico ? 
 
 Ans. He did next morning. 
 
 And the examination being closed and read over to the witness, 
 he desires to make the following corrections: 
 
 That on reflection, and from examining the record of the testi 
 mony in Mexico, he is incorrect in saying that the language, 
 used on the 5th October, and 1st October, was the same. He 
 should have said the language on the 22d September, and 1st 
 October, was the same ; and from not having shown the paper 
 No. 18, he supposed it to be the printed article, and not the ori 
 ginal manuscript from which the publication was made. And 
 he now states that it was the printed article he sent to Washing* 
 ton, and he never saw the original manuscript till the meeting of 
 this Court. And the testimony so corrected he declares correctly 
 recorded. 
 
 The accused gave in evidence the following agreement, with 
 the accompanying papers, viz : 
 
 "It is further agreed that the accused may read in evidence 
 the following extracts from the reports of General Pillow, Gen 
 eral Quitman, General Shields, and General Persifer F. Smith, as 
 published by Congress, Executive Doc., No* 1, 1847." 
 
49 
 
 Extract from General Pillow's report : 
 
 " The advance of General Quitman's division, which was to 
 have assaulted upon the left of the division, having fallen under 
 the fire of a battery on the outside of the outer walls, and being 
 unable to scale it in consequence of the want of ladders, were ^ 
 obliged to march several hundred yards to the south, and to enter > 
 the very breach through which portions of my command had J 
 passed at the commencement of the action." 
 
 Extract from General Q,uitman's report : 
 
 "The battalion of marines being posted to support the storm 
 ing parties, I ordered the assault at all points. The storming J 
 parties, led by the gallant officers who had volunteered for this ^ 
 desperate service, rushed forward like a resistless tide. The J 
 Mexicans, behind their batteries and breastworks, stood with 
 more than usual firmness. For a short time the contest was ^ 
 hand to hand, swords and bayonets were crossed, and rifles club- -^ 
 bed. Resistance was, however, vain against the desperate valor j 
 of our brave troops. The batteries and strong works were car 
 ried, and the ascent of Chepultepec on that side laid open to an 
 easy conquest. In these works were taken seven pieces of ar 
 tillery, one thousand muskets, and five hundred and fifty prisoners, <Z 
 of whom one hundred were officers, among them one General / 
 and ten Colonels. 
 
 "The gallant Captain Casey having been disabled by a severe 
 wound directly before the batteries, the command of the storming 
 party, of regulars in the assault, devolved on Captain Paul, of 
 the 7th infantry, who distinguished himself for his bravery. 
 
 " Lieutenant Fred. Steele, 2d infantry, with a portion of the 
 storming party, advanced in front of the batteries towards the 
 left, there scaled the outer walls through a breach near the top, 
 made by a cannon shot, ascended the hill directly in his front, 
 and was among the first upon the battlements. The young arid 
 promising Lieutenant Levi Gaunt, 7th infantry, was of this party. 
 He had actively participated jn almost every battle since the 
 opening of the war, but was destined here to find a 'soldier's 
 grave.' 
 
 " The column was re-organized for an attack upon the batteries 
 of the garita of the city, the regiment of riflemen, intermingled 
 with the bayonets of the South Carolina regiment, were placed 
 in advance three rifles and three bayonets under each arch." 
 
 Extract from General Shield's report : 
 
 "The other officers and soldiers of the whole command be 
 haved with equal gallantry and good conduct, Lieutenant Colonel 
 Baxter, commanding the New Yorkers, fell mortally wounded in 
 this gallant charge. 
 
 " The enemy made another determined stand at a position on 
 the road, above a mile from Chepultepec, behind a strong breast 
 work across the road, flanked on his right by a field redan, and 
 4 
 
50 
 
 protected upon the left by an impassable marsh. This position, 
 however, was soon rapidly carried by the rifles and palmettoes, 
 aided by a well directed fire from Drum's battery." 
 
 Extract from General Smith's report : 
 
 "I reported to General Quitman at Tacubaya on the morning 
 of the 13th September, and was ordered by him to form the re 
 serve of his column, in the attack on the east side of Chepul- 
 tepec. 
 
 " My brigade consisted of the regiment of mounted riflemen, 
 1st artillery, and 3d infantry. Two companies of riflemen and 
 two of the 3d infantry were absent on detached service. The 
 main body of General Q,uitman's command was advanced by the 
 road leading from the east end of Tacubaya, towards the foot of 
 the hill at Chepultepec. In pursuance of the General's direc 
 tions, I formed my brigade in his rear, and prolonging my right 
 beyond his to cover his right and rear from the enemy stationed 
 near the aqueduct leading from Chepultepec to the city, and I 
 detached two companies of riflemen under Captain Simonson, and 
 afterwards, a third, under Lieutenant Morris, still further to my 
 right and rear, the better to secure the whole. The enemy's prin 
 cipal batteries on this side were discovered to be at the foot of 
 the hill, near where the acqueduct leaves it, so that prolonging 
 my line in that direction brought the regiment of mounted rifle 
 men on my right, immediately in rear of the storming parties 
 under Captain Paul, 7th infantry, and when the attack was or 
 dered, they (the riflemen) entered the battery along with the 
 storming party, and carried the second battery in rear of the first, 
 where several guns and many prisoners were taken." 
 
 And thereupon Lieutenant Rich offers to the Court the follow 
 ing explanation of his testimony, which is read by consent as 
 follows, viz : Lieutenant Rich begs leave to state that he has 
 seen the original of paper No. 26, which he yesterday testified, 
 he was not the author of. He finds it in his handwriting, although 
 he had not then nor has he now any remembrance of writing the 
 same. 
 
 J. RICH, Lieut. U. S. M. C. 
 
 And the Court then adjourns till tomorrow morning at 10 
 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, 
 September 8, 1852, 10 o'clock, a. m. 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, the members of the Court, 
 the Judge Advocate, the accused and his counsel. 
 The proceeding of yesterday are read and approved. 
 And thereupon it appearing to the Court that John Roach, a 
 witness summoned for the accused, is sick and cannot attend, and 
 
51 
 
 the accused swearing that he expects him to prove the facts fol 
 lowing, (if here,) the Judge Advocate agrees to admit said state 
 ment as if testified to by said witness, which statement is as fol 
 lows, viz : The accused states that he confidently expects to 
 prove by John Roach, a resident of the city of Washington, the 
 following facts: First, that said John Roach was a sergeant at 
 tached to the company of marines commanded by Lieutenant 
 Young at the advance of the troops at the storming and assault 
 of Chepultepec, and when the marines halted, the accused called 
 to them to follow him, on which the said Sergeant John Roach 
 and a few others did spring up and follow the accused, until said 
 Roach received a severe wound in the thigh, which caused him 
 to remain behind, and the accused with the others advanced on 
 ward towards the enemies' batteries. 
 
 Second, that John Roach as he ran out saw Captain, now Bre 
 vet Major, Reynolds sitting or lying down under cover of the 
 embankment and Maguay bushes. 
 
 Third, that he can state the particular place and situation in 
 which Captain Reynolds was during the storming of Chepultepec, 
 and during the fire of the musketry, (the marines being under 
 cover,) that Captain Reynolds remained quiet, permitting a part 
 of his men to retire to the rear. 
 
 Fourth, that witness, since the occasion above referred to, 
 heard Captain Reynolds make various threats against the accused, 
 and, among others, that he never would be satisfied until he suc 
 ceeded in getting accused out of the corps, or words to that effect, 
 or of similar import. 
 
 Fifth, that Captain Reynolds for the purpose of carrying out 
 his threats against the accused, made inquiries of the witness, 
 and in his witnesses presence, of several other persons and ma 
 rines, for the purpose of finding out some charge against the ac 
 cused. 
 
 Sixth, that he saw Captain Reynolds in Washington some 
 time in July or first of August last, and that he stated that he 
 went on to Washington to have accused tried or broke, or words 
 to that effect, or of similar import. 
 
 JOHN S. DEVLIN. 
 
 Sworn in open Court. 
 
 H. W. DAVIS, Judge Advocate. 
 
 And there the accused closes his case. 
 
 And the accused having closed his case, the Judge Advocate 
 proceeds to offer the following rebutting evidence : 
 
 Aug. S. Nicholson, a lawful witness, produced and sworn by 
 the Judge Advocate, answers as follows, to the following inter 
 rogatories : 
 
 Question by the Judge Advocate. 
 
 Say if you know John Roach, Sergeant in Lieutenant Young's 
 company of marines in Mexico, and where you saw him on the 
 day of the storming of Chepultepec, and at what point of time. 
 
52 
 
 and place was he wounded, and was the accused near him, or 
 how far from him at that time ? 
 
 Ans. I did ; he was orderly sergeant of the company to which 
 I was attached. I saw him at the storming of Chepultepec, with 
 his company, which was somewhere about the centre of the line. 
 He was wounded while advancing on the Tacubaya road, some 
 two or three hundred yards from the corner of the road above re 
 ferred to and stated, before the marines had taken cover. I saw 
 him fall out of the ranks, with the exclamation that he was 
 wounded, and did not again see him till I saw him in the city of 
 Mexico. At that particular time I don't remember seeing Lieu 
 tenant Devlin at all. Some few moments, or a short time before, 
 I saw him at or near the head of the line. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 Did said John Roach or any other marines, spring up from their 
 cover and follow Lieutenant Devlin, on his call, after the marines 
 had taken shelter? 
 
 Ans. I did not see Lieutenant Devlin at all after we took shel 
 ter, till on the road to the Garita de Belen. 
 
 Question by the same. 
 
 How far was Roach from you when wounded? 
 
 Ans. The company was a small one. He was twenty or thirty 
 paces before me. 
 
 Here the Judge Advocate closes his examination, and the ac 
 cused propounds the following cross-interrogatories: 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 Were you separated from your company at the time referred 
 to in your answer above, and if so, how long were you separated ? 
 
 Ans. No. 1 was with my company at that time and place. 
 The company was not separated before they took shelter. When 
 the flag was taken down from the Castle of Chepultepec, there 
 was a general rush, and the companies were all broken and min 
 gled up ; they again were separated and arranged in the yard of 
 the Castle, excepting those who kept on with Captain Terrett on 
 the San Cosme road. . At the time of the rush 1 was separated 
 from my Captain, and did not see him again for three days, I 
 think. 
 
 Cross-questioned by the same. 
 
 Did not your company and the marines halt under cover of a 
 dilapidated adobe house, before you halted in the Maguay ditch, 
 and might not Sergeant Roach have left that cover without your 
 notice ? 
 
 Ans. We did halt at the rancho. He might, by possibility, 
 have left the cover there, but I don't think he did. He did not, 
 however, leave his company there, for it was just after the ma 
 rines left that place, that he was wounded with his company. 
 
 And here the testimony is closed, and the same having been 
 read over, the witness declares the same correct. 
 
 The accused, by leave of the Court, propounds the following 
 question to Captain Terrett : 
 
53 
 
 Question by the accused. 
 
 While the marines made their first halt under cover of the 
 adobe house, did you or not, see the accused rushing forward, and 
 do you or not know that Sergeant Roach and others, advanced at 
 that time with the accused? 
 
 Ans. I saw the accused about that time, but have no recollec 
 tion of seeing him moving. I do not know that Sergeant Roach 
 or any other men, advanced with the accused. He had no 
 men under his command; the halt at the rancho was very short. 
 
 The evidence being read over to the witness, is declared to be 
 correct. 
 
 And here the Judge Advocate closes his testimony, and the ac 
 cused closes his testimony. And thereupon the Court proceeds to 
 consider the said case. 
 
 And the Judge Advocate submits the case to the Court, with 
 the following observations, which are read to the Court in the 
 following words : (The remarks of the Judge Advocate not being 
 properly part of the record, are omitted.) 
 
 And thereupon the accused offers the following request to the 
 Court : 
 
 The accused now asks until next Monday to arrange and pre 
 pare his defence, and states that the preparation of such defence 
 will require at least that time, as it will occupy a day or two to 
 arrange the testimony preparatory to writing out the defence. 
 
 And thereupon the Court order that the time required be al 
 lowed. 
 
 And thereupon Lieutenant Augustus Nicholson prays to be ex 
 cused from passing sentence on the accused, since he was objected 
 to by the accused, who, though he withdrew such objection, may 
 still entertain some want of confidence in him. 
 
 And thereupon the Court is cleared for consultation, and hav 
 ing consulted in the absence of said Lieutenant Nicholson, the 
 Court is opened, and the Court announces its decision, as follows : 
 
 It is the opinion of the Court that Lieutenant Nicholson be not 
 excused. 
 
 And thereupon the Court adjourns till to-morrow morning at 
 10 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, 
 September 9, 1852, 10 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, the members of the Court, 
 and the Judge Advocate. 
 
 The proceedings of the Court of yesterday were read and ap 
 proved. 
 
 And thereupon the Court adjourns till to-morrow morning at 
 10 o'clock. 
 
54 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, 
 September 10, 1852, 10 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, and the members of the 
 Court. 
 
 The proceedings of yesterday are read and approved, 
 
 And the Court adjourns till to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, 
 September 11, 1852, 10 o'clock, A. M. 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, and the members of the 
 Court. 
 
 The proceedings of yesterday are read and approved. 
 The Court adjourns till to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, 
 
 September 13, 1852. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, the members of the Court, 
 and the accused. 
 
 The proceedings of the Court on the llth September were read 
 and approved. 
 
 The President of the Court announced to the accused that he- 
 would be called upon for his defence on Wednesday morning at 
 10 o'clock. 
 
 Thereupon the Court adjourned till to-morrow morning at 
 10 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, 
 September 14, 1852, 10 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, and the members of the 
 Court. 
 
 The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved. 
 Thereupon the Court adjourned till morrow morning, 10 o'clock. 
 
 NAVY YARD, BROOLLYN, 
 September 15, 1852, 10 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present, the President of the Court, the members of the Court, 
 the Judge Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. 
 
 And thereupon the Court asks the said accused, Lieutenant 
 John S. Devlin, if he be ready to proceed with his defence. 
 
 And the said Lieutenant J. S. Devlin, declares he is ready, and 
 offers his defence to the Court, which is read in the following 
 words, that is to say : (See defence appended.) 
 
55 
 
 The Judge Advocate submits in reply a few remarks, (which 
 are omitted as not properly being part of the record.) 
 
 And, thereupon, the Judge Advocate closes the case, and sub 
 mits the same to the court. 
 
 And, thereupon, the Court being closed, the proceedings are 
 read over by the Judge Advocate which having been heard and 
 considered, the Court does find as follows : 
 
 The Court ffnd the first specification of the first charge proven, 
 except the following words, viz : "The President of the United 
 States, the Secretary of the Navy, at the date of the publication 
 thereof," which words the court find not proved. 
 
 And the Court find the accused guilty of the first charge. 
 And the Court find the first specification of the second charge 
 proven. And they find the second specification of the second 
 charge proven. 
 
 And the Court find the accused guilty of the second charge. 
 And the Court find the first specification of the third charge 
 proven, except the words following, that is to say; "Copy or 
 cause to be copied the said written communication, and that the 
 copy so made," and the iollowing words: "did so copy or cause 
 to be copied," and the words : " to copy and," which words they 
 find not proven. 
 
 And the Court find the accused guilty of the third charge* 
 proven, except so much thereof as states the request of the ac 
 cused to Sergeant McGann to copy said article in the specifica 
 tion mentioned. 
 
 And the Court find the accused guilty of the fourth charge. 
 And, thereupon, the Court considering the said charges and 
 specifications and the evidence touching the same, and having 
 fully and maturely deliberated on the same, does pronounce the 
 following sentence 
 
 The Court does sentence the accused, 1st Lieutenant John S. 
 Devlin, to be cashiered the service. 
 
 And, thereupon, the Court having closed all business legally 
 before them, adjourns sine die. 
 
 Capt. A. N. BROVOR 
 " H. B. TYLER, 
 " J. L. C. HARDY, 
 " G. H. TERRETT, 
 " A. H. GILLESPIE, 
 Lieut. B. E. BROOKE, 
 
 W. A. T. MADDOX, 
 " J. C. GRAYSON, 
 " A. S. NICHOLSON. 
 
 HENRY WINTER DAVIS, Judge Advocate. 
 
 The foregoing sentence is hereby approved this 18th Septem 
 ber, 1852. 
 
 MILLARD FILLMORE. 
 
ft P E N G E . 
 
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. JOHN S. DEVLIN. 
 
 The accused, reserving to himself the benefit of the several 
 objections to the Court, made by him previous to and after the 
 organization of the Court, and to the several objections made 
 and insisted upon by him during the course of the trial, makes 
 the following defence to the charges and specifications against 
 him. To the first charge: "Treating with contempt his supe 
 rior officers." The word "contempt," as defined by lexicogra 
 phers, means the act of despising, the act of viewing or con 
 sidering, and treating as mean, vile, and worthless; disdained; 
 and is considered one of the strongest expressions of a mean 
 opinion. For the purpose of sustaining the specification under 
 this charge, the prosecution have introduced the following testi 
 mony: The admissions of the accused that paper No. 18, and 
 letter No. 19, are in his handwriting, and also the testimony of 
 Sergeant McGann to the fact of the paper No. 18 being in the 
 handwriting of the accused as evidence, per se, that the accused 
 wrote and prepared it for publication. The declaration made by 
 the accused at the time he handed the paper to Sergeant Mc 
 Gann, (see his testimony,) that it had been put into his hand by 
 some person with that party's request, that it be published in the 
 Daily Eagle, is affirmative testimony, offered on the part of the 
 prosecution, and cannot therefore be impeached ; the whole tes 
 timony must be taken together ; the party offering the testimony 
 cannot impeach his own witness, and has no right to travel out 
 of the record (the evidence) to explain or vary that testimony. 
 If then it was handed to him, he did not write it, (that is, he 
 was not the author,) in the sense used in this specification. Nor 
 did he prepare it for publication, nor did he publish or cause it 
 to be published the mere expression used in Sergeant McGann's 
 testimony. Lieutenant Devlin " asked me if I knew any person, 
 or if I wou'd attend to it," made use of under the circumstances 
 and upon the occasion, (in a hurry,) taken in connexion with the 
 fact that it was originally handed to the accused, is not, nor 
 ought it to be, in a criminal case, where the law is imperative 
 upon the Court, to give the accused the benefit of every reasona 
 ble doubt, evidence of a request or direction from the accused to 
 publish it. It was handed to Sergeant McGann to dispose of it 
 as he chose, he had the option to publish it or destroy it. And 
 if he, McGann, did publish it, the accused is at a loss to imagine 
 upon what principle he is to be held accountable for the acts of 
 McGann ; and the letter of the accused, No. 19, cannot be re 
 sorted to for the purpose of explaining or giving larger scope to 
 
58 
 
 the testimony of McGann, he intrusted to McGann's " care and 
 prudence" that is, le^j^^t^ntirglyj-iscretionary with Mc 
 Gann to publish the paperor not; the letter, No. 19, says, "you 
 might in fact do with it as you pleased." McGann never read 
 the paper over until next day, when he copied it, and the follow 
 ing day (Monday) it was left by McGann at the office of the 
 Eagle. McGann's copy has never been produced, and the man 
 ner in which it was written, whether on one side or both, does 
 not appear. The learned Judge Advocate seemed to put great 
 stress on the fact that the paper, No. 18, was written on both 
 sides; take that fact in connexion with the fact that it was to 
 be published, (see Lomas's testimony,) it was to be written only 
 on one side, and it must furnish an irresistable argument in favor 
 of the accused that he did not intend to copy No. 18 (I mean 
 that particular copy) to be published. I admit that the copying 
 of a libel is a publication, but that is not within the specification ; 
 he must have *' published, or caused to be published, in the Brook 
 lyn Eagle," to come within the specification. That the accused 
 copied the paper, No. 18, from the original manuscript, (and 
 without any malicious intent, for in the absence of proof, malice 
 in the present case cannot be inferred,) is a fact that cannot be 
 disputed. How the mere copying of a paper, and delivering 
 such copy to Sergeant McGann, under the circumstances, can 
 be construed into a contempt of his "superior officers," the ac 
 cused is lost in conjecture. There was certainly an absence of 
 motive from the testimony in the case, as no unfriendly feelings 
 are proved to exist between the accused and any of his " supe 
 rior officers," with the single exception of Brevet Major Reynolds. 
 
 It would be doing violence to the construction of the English 
 language to make this specification apply to General Henderson, 
 (the prosecution having abandoned the specification as applica 
 ble to the President of the United States and the Secretary of 
 the Navy,) and it cannot in this specification be applicable to 
 any other officer the rule being that the particular persons must 
 be named in the specification, and the particular manner in 
 which the party is or may be affected must be pointed out with 
 reasonable certainty. 
 
 Charge 2d. Using provoking and reproachful words respecting 
 other persons of the Marine Corps. 
 
 The first specification charges that they are " provoking and 
 reproachful" towards General Henderson, Major Howie, and 
 Major Nicholson. 
 
 It is a very difficult matter, the accused submits, under this 
 charge, if he were entirely innocent, to disprove the same. What 
 the officers named in the specificaiion personally might consider 
 provoking and reproachful, is a question exclusively for them to 
 decide. But when the subject is brought before a Court-Martial 
 composed of honorable and chivalric men, such as the present 
 Court is composed of, a common sense construction will be given 
 by the Court to the effect of the words. 
 
59 
 
 v lt is difficult to say how words in an anonymous communica 
 tion, emanating from an obscure pres^, under the signature of 
 "An Observer," could, under any circumstances, provoke men 
 who are at the head of an honorable and brave corps. To make 
 the words reproachful and provoking towards the gentlemen 
 named, it must first be conceded that those persons named in the 
 specification, are "The Stay-at-home Drones of Headquarters," a 
 concession which the accused will not permit or suffer to be per 
 mitted as emanating from him. The accused most solemnly pro 
 tests and insists that his intercourse with the gentlemen referred 
 to, precludes the possibility of any such intention on his part. 
 The accused deeply regrets that in his answer to the 2d specifi 
 cation under charge 2d, he deems it due to the Marine Corps, to 
 which he has been attached more than twenty-eight years, and 
 also necessary to his defence, that he should here examine some 
 what in detail the testimony taken. The accused equally regrets 
 that the decision of the Court, admitting declarations made by 
 him in Mexico, about five years since, compelled him to exam 
 ine this testimony in detail, which he otherwise would have re 
 frained from and left unnoticed, on this record. Brevet Major 
 John G. Reynolds, whose hostility to the accused for about five 
 years, (see his testimony,) having heard of the article having been 
 published, hastened to the Eagle Office and obtained all the in 
 formation he could ; not for the purpose, as the accused insists and 
 the testimony shows, of vindicating his character as an officer, 
 but to gratify his malevolent feelings towards the accused. What 
 officer, the accused ventures to ask, would go from the city of New 
 York to Washington, for the " double purpose " of prosecuting the 
 accused and getting a furlough for his son ? The accused sub 
 mits that it is not usual for persons to visit Washington for the 
 purpose of procuring a furlough ; and he submits from the facts 
 and testimony in this cause, that he has a right, and this Court 
 ought to infer, that the visit of Major Reynolds to Washington 
 would not have taken place at that time had the communication 
 not been published, and that his principal object in going there 
 was to insist, in person, to have the accused brought to a Court- 
 Martial. And the accused insists that the controversy is more of 
 a private than of a public nature. The accused insists that the 
 language of the communication is, in substance, proved by the 
 testimony not only of Major Reynolds, but also by all the testi 
 mony in the case. 
 
 And that the language was not used for the purpose of affect 
 ing the character of any person. That Major Reynolds and others 
 sat on the ground under cover of an embankment topped with 
 Maguay bushes, during the fire and storming of Chepultepec, 
 and the outer batteries, is abundantly proved, and also that 
 Major Twiggs, who was killed at the head of his command, and 
 the accused were the only marine officers whose blood flowed in 
 the Valley of Mexico. If, then, those public events, collected and 
 published as Mr. Lomas testifies, from " narrations of the accus- 
 
60 
 
 ed and other gentlemen" are proved true, where is the wrong in 
 giving the truth for good and proper ends. 
 
 The accused insists that there is no rule or regulation of the 
 Navy Department, prohibiting any person from copying or pub 
 lishing his or any version of a public transaction after such a 
 lapse of time. The only prohibitory order concerning publications 
 of the Mexican campaign, that the accused is aware of, was that 
 of Governor Marcy, while Secretary of War, dated January 28, 
 1847, which is appended to this record, and only prohibits public 
 ations for one month after the campaign to which such publica 
 tion relates. The accused therefore insists that, if he were so 
 minded, he has a clear right to speak, write, or publish, on pub 
 lic events or transactions that he witnessed in the Mexican war, 
 while unrestrained by any law or regulation on the subject. 
 
 Charge 3d. Guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer and a 
 gentleman. 
 
 The specification under this charge is not made out. McGann 
 swears that all the accused said upon this subject was, that the 
 accused asked him " if I knew any person, or if I would attend to 
 it," take this testimony in connection with the letter No. 19, and 
 it negatives the idea that the accused requested him to publish 
 the article. The letter expressly says "you might in fact do with 
 it as you pleased ;" this by no torture of our language can be 
 construed into a request. The specification must be proved as 
 charged, and proved in such manner as to leave no reasonable 
 doubt in the judgment of the Court as to what the writer of the 
 article intended. 
 
 It cannot be said that the article falsely lauds and magnifies 
 the conduct of the accused. The testimony of Brevet Major 
 Terrett, and Lieutenant Rich, fully proves the conduct of the ac 
 cused upon the occasion referred to, was that of a fearless officer 
 seeking to distinguish himself, and sustain the honor and bravery 
 of the corps to which he belonged. And the accused submits, that 
 it is rarely any newspaper articles, laudatory of the acts of an 
 officer, are published without being colored in such a manner as 
 to give them the effect intended by the writer. The article in 
 the present instance was witten, as Mr. Lomas testifies, for the 
 purpose of "placing Lieutenant Devlin properly before the 
 country." 
 
 If Mr. Lomas, the writer, saw fit to give it a coloring, the ac 
 cused ought not to be held responsible for that act. 
 
 Charge 4th. Guilty of scandalous conduct tending to the de 
 struction of good morals. 
 
 The specification under this charge in not made out in any re 
 spect, for there is no evidence that the accused had anything to 
 do with the statements contained in the article published, except 
 as stated in the testimony of John Lomas, and the testimony 
 certainly shows an entire absence of all malice, which is the gist 
 of this specification ; and if the Court find the accused not to be 
 the original author of the communication, be it true or false, the 
 
61 
 
 accused is not liable for it except so far as he may be amenable 
 for copying it. 
 
 The accused proposes to resume this subject in connection- with 
 a review of the testimony in his behalf. And first the learned 
 Judge Advocate has termed the evidence of Mr. John Lomas as 
 "most extraordinary testimony." Mr. Lomas stands before this 
 Court uncontradicted in regard to any material fact. And he 
 swears positively that he is the author ; " I wrote it," says he "of 
 my own volition, and handed it to the accused," and there is no 
 evidence that the accused read it or knew who was the author of 
 it, nor is there any evidence that the accused knew it was in 
 Lomas' handwriting. Lomas himself says it is not like his ordi 
 nary handwriting. Secondly, what motive could Lomas have in 
 this case to state a direct falsehood, it is not pretended that he 
 had any inimical feelings towards any member of the marine 
 corps. 
 
 The Judge Advocate had notice nearly a week previous to the 
 examination, that Lomas would be examined as a witness, and 
 the facts he was expected to testify to, and had it in his power 
 to have impeached Lomas ; as he did not do so the positive tes 
 timony of Mr. Lomas must be taken as true in opposition to in 
 ferences. The Court are bound to decide the case upon the tes 
 timony before them, and they are not at liberty to travel out of 
 the record. To convict the accused, the Court must decide that 
 Lomas has been guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury, by acquit 
 ting the accused, the Court rid themselves of that alternative. 
 
 The rule of evidence is, a positive fact sworn to shall control 
 circumstances. There is another well established rule in crimi 
 nal cases, the prisoner must be proved to be guilty beyond all 
 reasonable doubt, and those doubts may arise either upon the 
 proof or the effect of it. 
 
 What then is the true state of this case, stripped of all its tech 
 nicalities. Mr. John Lomas, a friend of Lieutenant Devlin, had 
 long previous to the publication of paper No. 18, had conversa 
 tions with the accused and other gentlemen of the corps, on the 
 subject of the Mexican campaign, in which all took an interest, 
 and of his own volition writes a newspaper squib, for the pur 
 pose, and that alone, (as sworn to,) of doing justice to his friend ; 
 he hands it to him in the street in New York, accused copies it, 
 hands it to Sergeant JVlcGanu without any special directions; 
 McGann copies it and causes it to be published ; this excites the 
 nice feelings of Brevet Major Reynolds, he visits Washington as 
 the champion of the whole marine corps, to protect its integrity, 
 and the honor and valor of the officers connected with it, by pre 
 ferring charges of a grave nature against the accused, which 
 would never have been brought had he not had personal and 
 private malice to gratify. 
 
 The accused insists that the only article of the Navy Regula 
 tions which can be made applicable to the charges and specifica 
 tions against him is article third, which provides that any officer 
 
62 
 
 guilty of oppression, cruelty, fraud, profane swearing, drunken 
 ness, or any other scandalous conduct, tending to the destruction 
 of good morals, shall be cashiered, or suffer such other punish 
 ment as a Court-Martial shall adjudge. The accused respectfully 
 insists that there is nothing in the evidence before the Court that 
 brings his case within the said article, and that the Court are 
 bound, in passing upon the evidence, to take all the facts and cir 
 cumstances into consideration, and especially the following. He, 
 the accused, was for years in the city of Brooklyn after the alleged 
 threat in Mexico, of "publishing Major Reynold's conduct to the 
 world, or to his constituents," and no unfavorable inference should 
 be drawn against him on account of such previous threat, for that 
 threat he has been heretofore tried in Mexico, and that, too, upon 
 the testimony of Major Reynolds ; that there is no evidence before 
 the Court that since his return from Mexico he has ever repeated 
 any such threats, or has manifested any ill-feelings towards Major 
 Reynolds. He appeals to the extracts from the several official 
 reports and papers which have been introduced by him for the 
 purpose of showing that he faithfully performed his duty on the 
 occasion referred to, and that he bears scars upon his front as 
 evidence that he did not turn his back upon the enemy. 
 
 In conclusion, he solemnly protests that whatever part or agency 
 the Court may attribute to him in relation to the said publication 
 of the communication signed "An Observer," he did not design 
 the slightest disrespect to any officer connected with the public 
 service. He may have been indiscreet, nay more, he may have 
 err 3d in copying the paper, No. 18, and handing it to Sergeant 
 McGann, but it was an error of the head and not of the heart. 
 In hastily reading over the paper as he copied it, it never occur 
 red to him that it might possibly be construed in the manner 
 sought to have it construed by the charges and specifications 
 brought forward in this matter. 
 
 With these brief remarks the accused submits this case to the 
 Court, relying confidently and respectfully on their judgment to 
 discriminate between actions and motives. 
 
 JOHN S. DEVLIN.