and influential moneyed connections. His estate is chefly in the rebel States but does not as I think consist to any considerable extente of plantatiosn or slaves. I do not learn that he has any property in the free laoyal States except stock interests in the iron mines of Lake Superior. He is of English extraction and perhaps born in England. His gamily connections are chiefly there. His estate is largely composed of funds and personal propeerty and therefore exposed to confiscation and plunder by the pretended authority of the Confederate Governemtn in case he should exhibit Union views. From these circumstances it is inferred that his interests and sympathies are naturally Southern and English and therefore hostile.

There is nothing to show that he has ever been a plitician or that he is a conspirator and it is clear that he is a non-combatant. It appears that he was named as one of the commissioners of the Confederated loan in Savannah and that he did not decline the postion. He alleges, no boubt with truth that he did not act as commissioner, but it would not have offended his sense of propriety probably if the whole loan had been taken through the influence of his name. On the other hand it is not unlikely that refusla of that position would have driven him from the South robbed of his property and theerefore that his compliance was under restraint to that txtent. He went to England in July, 1861, apparently on private business. There is no evidence that while abroad he interested himself in the public concerns of this country, North or Soth. On the contrary several worthy persons who were familiar with his actions certify that his non-intervention was real and complete.

When arrested nothin gwas found to implicate him in any dislyal proceedings. Indeed there is evidence of his having acted the part of prudence most thoroughly, while the condition of his estate and family (especialoly the latter) were such as to excuse the strongest solicitude to return to Georgia. mr. Andrew Low had for partner in the firm of Andrew Low & Co., Mr. Charles Green, also a prisoner in Fort Warren, and it would seem from papers found on Mr. Green that they were probably brothers-in-law as well as partners. The circumstances staht have transpired have created the impression that Mr. Green and his family are disposed to be active traitors. Thsi relation has been prejudicial to the case of Mr. Low. A careful scrutiny, however, shows that Mr. Low and Mr. Green have dissolved partnership and separated their business interests for the future, and that such differences and divergancies have occurred to preclude the idea of any sympathy in business or other transaction. Mr. Low's estate is in such condition as to [be] put in peril by any active adhesion to the cause of the United States. He will of course, indeed does, decline to take the oath of allegiance.

My conclusion is that Andrew Low is at present from interest, sympathy, education and prejudice a disloyal man, and if permitted to go South or to England would from necessity throw his influence against the cause of the United States. But he ahs been represented to be an honorable and upright man in business and personal relations and that his promise could be relied on implicitly. He is clearly no comspirator and has no political ambition to mislead him. Good and true men who have known him long express the highest degree of confidence that he would keep any parole that he would give. All this I believe. If this view of Mr. Low's character is not mistaken the public safety would not by compromised by allowing him his liberty