Mr. LANE, of Indiana. I understand none of them are for property. They are mine r offenses perpetrated in the Army, every one of them properly referable to that bureau. That bureau as done an immense amount of work. If you discharge them now, what he comes of all these records? Who is to look into them“? Who is to make up the cases? It is utterly impossible for the President, in the multiplicity of his duties, to look into all these cases; it is physically impossible for the SecyWar to do so; and to facilitate the administration of criminal justice it was found necessary to establish this bureau. But the distinguished Senfrom Delaware says that looking to the past history of military commissions, he trembles for the liberty of the people. What is the past history of the Bureau of Military Justice, and who has trembled before its sentences except the rebel traitor and the rebel sympathizer, the assassins of the POTUS, and their cocon spirators North and South? What is the past history of the Bureau of Military Justice, and what is the past history of military commissions? Who authorized a military commission to tr the murderers and assassins of your mar tyr resident? Who called and convened the board to try them, and who composed that board? The peers and equals of the roudest Senator upon this floor in general intelligence, 'in patriotism, and in legal learnin. Who ondered that military commission? 1‘he present POTUS convened that military commission that passed sentence upon the assassins of the late POTUS, and they had a felon’s doom not alone under the sentence of the militarycourt, but approved by the POTUS himself. I indorse lil letter, syllable, and spirit, not only the organization of the court, but the approval of the sentence of that court. I have no doubt of the jurisdiction of the court in that case. Is that one of the cases referred to in the past history of this Bureau of Militar Justice to which the gentleman excepts? oes he except to the sentence of that court convened by AndrewJohnson, the POTUS, sanctioned by him, and sanctioned by the general concurrence of the whole eo ple and the universal public sentiment 0 all Christendom? Who would reverse that sentence today, and bring back the miserable murderers, assassins, and conspirators who sought to overthrow the Republic in the person of the President of the Republic? I feel in my heart of hearts that I owe them a debt of gratitude for the noble and manly manner in which they discharged their duty. I bow in obeissnce to the decision of that court. It was right and proper, in my opinion, and I apprehend no detriment either to the ublie security or the public liberty from any military commission constituted as that' was. I only re ret that the POTUS di not feel it his duty to persevere in well doing and bring Jefferson avis before the same or another military commission that sum mary human justice might have been meted out to him, if not commensurate with his crimes, at least all we could do, and leave him to the terrible retributions of hereafter. What has been the history of this Bureau of Military Justice that we should apprehend any danger from it? Have there been any wrong decisions, any innocent men punished? I know of no such case. I apprehend no such case can be presented. An allusion was made to the head of that Bureau of Military Justice, General Holt. Who is he? A life long Democrat so long as Democracy meant devotion to human rights and the union and the liberty of the Republic, but. the moment when assassins and traitors sought to strike down the Republic that very moment he abandoned the Democratic party, was found faithful amen the faithless 1n the Cabinet of that weak an wicked old man, Mr. Buchanan, and from that hour to the present his history is beyond all eulo'gy of mine. I can only hope for myself and for my friends that when our history shall be written and read of all men we may retire into the sanctity and security of the grave with the same proud historic record that will shed a halo of glory around the name of General Holt a noble man; a patriot; an exception in the midst of his traitorous compeers. He is the head of the Bureau of Military Justice, and you are to strike out this section to legislate him out of office. For what cause? simply because he assisted in the prosecution of the assassins of President Lincoln before a military court convened under the order of the SecyWar and President Johnson, and the sentence of which was approved by President Johnson. What beyond that has Judge Holt done? His offense “ hath that extent, no more.” Now, aword as to the bill. Under the present law we have a Judge Advocate General, with the rank of a brigadier general an assist ant, with the rank of8 colonel, and as many judge advocates as there are armies in the field. Under this bill we propose to retain the Judge Advocate General, an asst, and for the time being ten asst judge advocates, with the rank of major, to be mustered out the very moment the SecyWar thinks there is no further occasion for their services. I cannot conceive there is anything wrong in this section. I am utterly at a loss to conceive why it should be stricken out, except for the simple purpose, as I apprehend, though not avowed, of rebuking the Government, rebuking the President, rebuking Congress for their past action for the last 2 years in their honest and patriotic efforts to see that traitors are punished and treason is made odious. If it as an object other than that, I am at a loss to conceive it.