trade with foreign countries from this port, and are caught in the act and fined only the amount of the proceeds of their illegal, treasonable transaction. Their lives, by every law, were forfeit to the country of their allegiance. The representative of that country takes a comparatively small fine from them, and a commission of that same country refunds it, because of its impropriety. Grotius, Puffendorf, Vattel, and Wheaton will be searched, it is believed, in vain for precedents for such action.

Why city international law to govern a transaction between a rebellious traitor and his own Government? Around the State of Louisiana the Government had placed the unpassable barrier of law, covering every subject, saying to him from that State no cotton should be shipped and no arms imported, and there no mails or letters should be delivered. To warn off foreigners, to prevent bad men of our own citizens violating that laps. Now, whatever may be the law relating to the intruding foreigner, can it ba said for a moment that the fact that a traitor has successfully eluded the vigilance of the Government that that very success purges the crime which might never have been criminal but for that success? The fine will be restored because stare decisis, but the guilty party ought to be and will be punished. A course of treatment of rebels and traitors which should have such results would be not only "rose water," but diluted "rose water."

To other reason given for the decision, that the blockade had been raised, as a mistake in point of fact, both in the date and the place of capture. The capture was not made of a vessel running into the port of New Orleans, nor was the shipment made from one of those lagoons where in former times Lafitee, the pirate, carried on a hardly more atrocious business.

Something was said at the hearing that this money was intended by Kennedy & Co. for Northern creditors. Sending it to England does not seem to be the best evidence of that intention. But of course no such considerations could enter into the decision.

I have reviewed this decision at some length because it seems to me that if offers a premium for treasonable acts to traitors in the Confederate states. It says, in substance: Violate the laws of the United States as well as you can; send abroad all the produce of the Confederate States you can, to be converted into arms for the rebellion; you only take the risk of losing in transitu, and as the profits are fourfold, you can afford so to do; but it is solemnly decided that in all this there is not "personal depiction," for which you can our ought to be punished, even by a fine, and if you are the fine shall be returned.

I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,

BENJ. F. BUTLER,

Major-General, Commanding.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,

Trenton, July 22, 1862.

Brigadier General L. THOMAS,

Adjutant-General U. S. Army:

GENERAL: I beg leave to acknowledge the receipt of an official copy of your letter of the 18th instant addressed to John G. Brown, esq., of New York, authorizing him to recruit, within a fixed time, a brigade