Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. Well, sir, I pronounce that documentary evidence wholly exparte. According to the gentlemans own statement there was no fair chance for the case to be represented before the committee. Now, sir, to illustrate the manner in which This bill, if enacted, will operate, it is only necessary to refer to cases coming within my own knowledge: and l have no doubt that many other gentlemen have knowledge of similar cases. Llakef sir, the case of a general order issued by the captain or lieutenant in command of some 30 or 40 soldiers at a particular place. Suppose it he a general order to arrest guerrillas. Under such a general order, a corporal, or a soldier under his command, may, to vent his private malice, seize and imprison a penceable citizen, against whom there is no reasonable ground of suspicion. Suppose he goes further, and in the act of ar resting the man refuses quarter and shoots him down. A man may do that under a General order to arrest guerrillas; and an order of that sort is by this bill made a justification of an act of that kind. An instance of this kind occurred in my own State. There were 3 poor laboring men living near the border of Tennessee who escaped into Kentucky to avoid conscription in the rebel army. They were Union men, and that was their only resort to avoid conscription in the rebel army. They were engaged for a time in performing day labor. Becoming anx ious in regard to their families, they started on foot toward their former residence to hear from their families. Whoa they were passing through the neighborhood of a certain town, where there were some 30 or 40 soldiers under the command of a captain, some one gave information that 3 men had been seen walking alone, passing through the neighborhood. An order was issued by the officer in command of that squad for their arrest as guerrillas. Half a dozen drunken soldiers, under the command of a corpora l or lieutenant, started off to find these men. They were overtaken. It happened that 2 or 3 respectable citizens were witnesses of the occurrence. These poor men were sitting down, pulling 06 their shoes to wade across the river. These drunken soldiers, as soon as they came near enough, fired 4 or 5 rounds upon the men without utterin a solitary word. 2 of them were shot dea on the s 01:; the other, who was very severely wounde, was, in consequence of his appeals for mercy, taken into custody, and after weeks and months of sufiering from his wounds he recovered, but he is disabled for life. It turned out that the wounded man was a loyal Tennesseean. They were all loyal men who had escaped from confederate conscription; poor men who had no arms at all; good, honest, loyal men. These o the ers when they approached did not even say halt. but they shot 2 and wounded the other. Only one had his life spared through his cries for mercy. Now, suppose this survivor shall sue these reckless men. If he does, under this law, they will be exonerated. All they have to do is to show there was an order to arrest guerrillas. This bill justifies those men and all others who may have committed like reckless acts. All they have to do to make their defense is to allege there was a general or special order to arrest guerrillas, and that they only omitted to 5 quarter, and that in arresting them they illed some and wounded the other. All these are cases which this bill justifies. There is another case where the unfortu nate victim was brought from Kentucky to this place and incarcerated under an orderto arrest eouiiterieiters. He was seized, brought here, and confined in Carroll prison, and kept there for 4 months. He came from my district and wrote to me. I found and consulte With him, and then I went to the President, and stated the one to him. The President expressed his astonishment that any man should be arrested in Kentucky mid brought here for counterfeiting, and imprisoned for 4 months without examination. He gave me an order to the SecyWar to exhibit the charges against the man. I was there informed that the protection of our currency against counterfeners had been delegated to t ie Treasury Dept. Going there I learned there was no evidence a inst him, and after a time I procured his discharge. He had been arrested and ilunged into prison under an order of some official in his own town of Shepherdsville, without any reasonable cause of suspicion. suppose he sues. All the defendant has to do is to plead that he made the arrest under the order of some captain or lieutenant or other officer in command at that place. He is not bound to show there was causeof suspicion. It can avail nothing for the plaintiff to show that the act on the part of the defendant was wholly malicious and without probable cause. The order alone is a full defense for the de fendant. Sir, it will be so in all cases where men, through malice and enmity and without any cause of suspicion at all, have been arrested and imprisoned at the instigation of oommanding officers. lakc another case, in regard to with elections. I will refer to a casientinerfreerginarg to which I was fully informed. During last summer, a man 50 or 60 years of age a peaceable citizen, between whom and a certain Officerthere was some ill feeling made his appearance at the polls on the morning of the election and offered to vote; for doin this that citizen, under the verbal order of that officer, was arrested and imprisoned for some days. If he sues, this bill will present a perfeet justification of the arrest and imprisonment. There were numerous general orders to shoot down or arrest guerrillas, to give them no quarter, and malicious soldiers and others, under those orders, shot down good and peace able citizens, wounded, arrested, and impris oned others. It is of no use for the plaintiff to show that these acts were wanton and mali cious, and without probable cause. If the defendant can show any general or special order from any commanding officer, captain, lieutenant, corporal, verbal or written, no matter what number of soldiers he shall command, such order, by this bill, is made of itself a complete and unanswerable defense. Let me show a little further how this bill has been framed. The law which this bill.ro poses to amend. provides when a defendant shall desire to remove his case to the circuit court of the U.S. he shall file a petition at the time of entering his appearance in the State court, and give security for his appearance at the circuit court. This bill expressly says he may at any time after he has entered his appearance, and made defense in the State court, and before a jury is impaneled for trial, file his ietition and remove the cause.