the inhabitants of New Orleans, Memphis, Cairo, Saint Louis, Louisville, Cincinnati and Chicago. Shaver signed this advertisement as passenger agent for the Southwestern States.
The undersigned upon reviewing the whole case is of opinion that John G. Shaver at the time of his arrest had for present advantage waived and lost his domicile in Canada and had assumed and given out to whomsoever was concerned that he was a resident dwelling within the United States.
Wherever born and wherever living Shaver owed obedience to the laws of the United States while enjoying their protection, and he and no right to engage in any seditious proceedings or practices which could endanger the public peace or safety, and he was necessarily amenable to the surveillance the police when it became necessary to exercise it.
The undersigned cannot regard the depositions which have been submitted to him on behalf of Shaver as sufficient in any way to discredit the testimony of Sears P. thompson. * That evidence shows that Shaver at a critical period of the present political disturbances of the country held forth seditious conversations at different times and t in that course of conduct after frequent warnings. The Government had found it necessary to prevent treasonable conversations and correspondence between the insurgents in insurrectionary regions and sympathizers, aiders and abettors in the States which yet remain undisturbed. Shaver claims that in his conversation he only wennt to the extent of making free comment on passing events. But he cannot complain if the language he held was so indiscreet and injurious as to draw upon him the warchful suspicion of the authorities engaged in finding out and arresting agents and emissaries of the insurrection. His occupation was just such a one as enabled him to act in such a capacity with effect and therefore such as to draw upon him the attention of a vigilant police. He was found frequently travleing over a known line used for secret communication by the agents of the insurrection in violation of the Executive proclamation. He had luggage which was adapted to the forrbidden purpose and his conversations brought his loyalty or his neutrality into distrust.
Lord Lyons takes notice of the fact that in the statement of the case which has been heretofore made by the undersigned the effect of testimony is sometimes given without specifying the sources from which it is derived. Some of the depositions in the case contain matter foreign to Shaver's case, and the general form of statement which Lord Lyons has noticed was adopted.
I may now specify that J. H. Noyes testtifies that he made the acquaintance of Shaver about the 1st of May, 1861, while Noyes was engaged as clerk of the Russell House, at Detroit; that he knew nothing of Shaver's history before that time; that he represented himself to be general agent for the Grand Trunk Railroad; that Louisville, Ky., was his headquarters; that Noyes thinks he saw Shaver the last time in August, 1861. He told Noyes that his next trip South would be to New Orleans, and offered to procure passes for Noyes if he would accompany Shaver. Noyes asked Shaver if therifficulties in getting through to New Orleans on account of our national troubles. Shaver assured him that there would be none; that he (Shaver) was a Canadian and a neutral and that he could easily get passes on any of the railroads of the Souther (insurrectionary) States. He wrote to Shaver to send him some letters to Richmond, Va.,