ANDERSONVILLE, GA., May 4, 1865.
Major General HOWELL COBB, Macon, Ga.:
GENERAL: After having, in obedience to orders, paroled for exchange (at Baldwin, Fla.) all the prisoners of war from this post, I returned yesterday. There being no duty for me to perform, and the armistice requiring my return to my home, I avail myself of a leave of absence on surgeon's certificate and leave for my home in Florida to-day if I can get transportation from Albany. Failing in that I propose reporting to you to-morrow. I regret to inform you that in the absence of all guard a raid of soldiers, their wives, and the citizens was made upon the military stores last night and all the small amount here taken off. Government mules and everything in the way of provisions and unused clothing and bedding were taken from the quartermaster's and hospital departments.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
GEO. C. GIBBS,
Washington City, May 5, 1865-9.50 p. m.
Major-General DIX, New York:
The President directs that you inform Mr. Foote that his letter asking leave of the President to go to California has been received and the applications refesed. The President further directs that you notify Mr. Foote that if he does not leave the United States within forty-eight hours after receiving your notice he will be arrested and dealt with for treason and rebellion agaisnt the United States Government. You will report whether he complies with the order of the President.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
WAR DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF MILITARY JUSTICE,
May 5, 1865.
JOHN HANNA, Esq.,
U. S. District Attorney, Dist. of Indiana, Indiannapolis, Ind.:
SIR: Your communication of the 2nd instant, in which you advise me that you have been informed that an effort is to be made to bring the cases of Bowles and others before a Federal judge on habeas corpus, and ask me for as copy of my opinion in regard to the jurisdiction of the military commission in their cases, has been received at this Bureau. In reply, I have to call your attention to the fact that under the President's proclamation of September 15, 1863, suspending the privilege of the habeas corpus in all cases of persons held in military custody for military offenses, any Federal or State judge would be obliged to dismiss an application made for the writ in behalf of these parties. So far as the knowledge of this Bureau extends the Federal judges have invariably refused to entertain such applications since the date of the proclamation. Moreover, the Supreme Court of the United States has decided in ex parte Vallandigham (1 Wallace, 243) that it has no authority to review the proceedings of military commissions, either on habeas corpus or certiotari, either by virtue of its original or its appellate jurisdition. It is not conceived, therefore, that the case of Bowles, &c., can possibly come to be formally reviewed by a