and that the following special instructions for persons in the military service of the United States be strictly observed, viz. :

The attention of every officer in the military service of the United States, is called to the proclamation of the President, issued on the 15th day of September, 1863, by which the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended.

If therefore a writ of habeas corpus should, in viola tion of the aforesaid proclamation, be sned out and served upon any officers in the military service of the United States, commanding him to produce, before any Court or Judge, any person who is held in his custody by the authority of the President of the United States, belonging to any one of the classes specified in the proclamation, it shall be the duty of such officer to make known by his certificate under oath, to whomsoever may issue or serve such writ of habeas corpus, that the person named in said writ is detained by him as a prisoner under the authority of the President of the United States. And such return having been made, if any person serving or attempting to serve such a writ, either by command of any Court or Judge or otherwise, and with or without process of law, shall attempt to arrest the officer making such return and holding in custody such person, the said officer is hereby commanded to refuse submission and obedience to such arrest, and if there should be any attempt to take such person from the custody of such officer, or arrest such officer, he shall resist such attempt, calling to his aid any force that may be necessary to maintain the authority of the United States, and render such resist ance effectual.

JAMES B. FRY, Provost-Marshal-General.

The courts were immediately called upon to decide whether the proclamation affected cases in which the writ had already been issued, and which were then pending. Several cases were in this position in the U. S. District Court of Pennsylvania, before Judge Cadwalader. In many of these cases postponements of the hearings had been allowed on the application of the Boards of Enrolment, and in one case the writ had been issued two weeks before, and the final hearing deferred on account of continuances granted on the Board of Enrolment's application. Judge Cadwalader, it appears, invited a full and free discussion, in order that he might have all the information possible before giving a decision.

One new case was presented which raised an important question. It is thus stated:

On Tuesday Gustavus Remak, Esq., counsel for a drafted man named John Yunger, prepared a petition in the usual form in his behalf for a writ of habeas corpus. Yunger, it seems, had been served in the sixth ward with a notice that he had been drafted, but as the notice had been directed to William, and not John, and as he alleged the name of John Yunger had not been drawn from the wheel, he appeared before the board claiming exemption. The board disallowed his claim, and, taking his notice, crased the name of William and inserted that of John.

The President's proclamation intervening, his counsel on Wednesday appeared, and, together with the petitioner, presented the following supplemental affidavit:

John Yunger, the petitioner named in the foregoing pe tition, being duly sworn according to law, doth further depose and say: I am not held under the command, nor am I in the custody of any military, naval, or civil officer of the United States, either as a prisoner of war, spy, aider or abet tor of the enemy, or as an officer, soldier, or seaman enrolled, drafted, or mustered in or belonging to the land and naval forces of the United States, or as a deserter therefrom, or otherwise amenable to military law or the rules and articles of war, or the rules and regulations prescribed for military and naval service by authority of the President of the

United States, or for resisting a draft, or for any other of fence against the military or naval service.

It will be noticed that the words of the President's proclamation are quoted in order to aver that the rela tor does not come within its terms. Judge Cadwalader granted a rule to show cause why the writ should not be granted, and this will bring up the whole question. In the course of the discussion Judge Cadwalader stated that the question was not whether there were hardships or whether a man had a remedy, but whether the remedy by a writ of habeas corpus was suspended. Congress could not, constitutionally, suspend all remedies which a man might have, but could they not suspend this particular form of remedy?

Mr. Reinak stated that he should follow a line of argument in order to present the case thus:

1. Has Congress the power to delegate the authority of suspending the writ of habeas corpus to the President of the United States? or is not Congress bound, if the Constitution invests it with the right of suspen sion, to exercise that power?

2. If Congress have the power so to delegate that authority, can they do it for an indefinite period of time? Is not "during the present rebellion" an indefinite period?

3. The act of Congress, if valid, authorizes the suspension "of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in any case throughout the United States, whenever in his judgment the public safety may require it." This means that the President shall exercise his judgment in each individual case as it arises, but does not empower the President to suspend the writ in all cases that may occur in future, as he does in his preclamation. He must decide in each case.

4. The act of Congress does not contemplate that the writs shall be refused by the judges, but, on the contrary, states in what manner, when issued, the writs shall be suspended.

5. The President's proclamation does not embrace parties who are applying for the writ when not drafted, but claimed as drafted persons.

He contended that the power to suspend the privi lege of the writ existed in Congress, and in Congress would seem to be limited in the Constitution, first, as alone, as it is a legislative power; and this power

to the territory to be affected; second, as to the time during which it is to last; and, third, as to individuals engaged or charged with being engaged in the rebellion or invasion; that is to say, there being nothing to the contrary in the Constitution, it was not contemplated by the framers of the Constitution that Congress should ever suspend the writ except in parts of the United States. The place where the rebellion or inva sion exists forms a imaterial question. Mr. Remak's next point was that the proclamation was limited to the individual. It must be against some person charg ed with an offence, but it does not touch the civilian who is not charged or is not held by any magistrate or any officer, civil or military, but who is still in the enjoyment of his rights, except that he stands in the po sition of having been enrolled, as one who may be called upon to serve the United States, and who may or may not be exempt on account of age or disability. When he had concluded

"or

Judge Cadwalader said that, as at present advised, he would not hear the district attorney. It appeared to him that the words "either as" in the proclamation, governed all the words until we came to the words " as," and hence that any person held "as " a soldier, enrolled or drafted, whether rightfully or not, came within the meaning of the act of Congress. There are none of these cases where the parties do not allege that they are held as "drafted" men, and hence they place themselves within the provisions of the act and the proclamation. My present opinion is that the proclamation applies to every man of whom the custody is held or claimed by military persons, so that they exert power over them as drafted men. As to those cases under the 14th section of the Conscription Act, there is no doubt that the proceedings are suspended. (These are the cases of appeals from the decision of the Board of Enrol

ment.) In regard to the other cases, where the allega tion is that the parties are not enrolled or drafted, he promised to give his decision the next morning.

By implication it would seem that Judge Cadwalader did not assent to the first point, and was of opinion that Congress had the right to delegate the power of suspending the writ to the President. A New York paper of September 17th says:

Considerable excitement has been occasioned in legal circles of this city and Brooklyn by the President's proclamation suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus during the continuance of the war. For several days past the Judges of the State Courts have been applied to for writs to discharge recruits and young men who had enlisted without the consent of their parents, while under age. Frederick A. Waring, a young man from Brooklyn, was brought up before Judge Betts yesterday on a writ of habeas corpus. This morning Mr. Slossom, for the Government, interposed the proclamation of the President of the United States, suspending the privilege of the writ. Mr. Waring, the uncle of the relator, contended that as the young man was yesterday in the custody of the Judge, before the proclamation of the President was known judicially, therefore, the case must be proceeded with as if no such proclamation had been issued, suspending the privileges of the writ. The Judge differed in opinion with Mr. Waring, but held the matter under

consideration.

In the Supreme Court, Judge Clerke had the cases of James Mehan and David C. Doremus, who claimed to have been illegally enlisted by Colonel Jenkins, brought up before him on writ of habeas corpus by adjournment. His Honor said that in view of the proclamation of the President of the United States suspending the writ of habeas corpus, the prisoners must be remanded and the writs discharged. The boys went off in custody of the sergeant and the guard.

In the case of John Baldinger, Judge Betts, of the U. S. District Court, said that the fact whether this man is improperly in custody or not is the very question which the Court is, by the proclamation, not allowed to inquire into.

The basis of the argument appears to be that the Government cannot compel an infant to serve. I do not concur in that view. Our form of government has as much right to call to the field every man capable of bearing arins as any absolute monarchy on the face of

the earth. The return states that he is detained as a deserter. It is a high crime for any one to desert his colors. The question occurs where he shall be tried. If he was brought before any of the courts of the United States he could not be tried, and the only tribunal before which he can be heard is that of the Provost Marshal. I see nothing in this case to induce me to take it out of the jurisdiction in which it is properly placed by the proclamation, which is conclusive on all the courts, and I have no power to inquire into the case of any man who is a soldier and under the military authorities. I have no more authority to act under the writ than I would have to issue a writ. This writ is, therefore, dismissed and the relator is remanded to the military tribunals.

On Saturday morning, Oct. 26th, Judge Sprague gave a decision in the United States District Court, Boston, in the case of the five persons held for military service by General Devens, and who had asked for writs of habeas corpus, one claiming to be a felon, one an alien, and the three others minors. It was urged by the counsel for the defendants that the President's proclamation suspending the writ of

habeas corpus did not apply to such cases. The judge concluded his opinion by saying that the objections made by the counsel in these cases to the application of the proclamation cannot prevail, and he was precluded from further inquiry by the proclamation, and if any of the parties before him were entitled to relief they must seek it from the officers or the tribunals able by law to grant it. The prisoners were then remanded to the custody of Gen. Devens, to be taken back to the camp at Long Island.

A writ of habeas corpus, issued by Judge Shipman, of the U. S. Circuit Court, upon Provost marshal Pardee at New Haven for the body of George Howland, an alleged deserter from the Sixth Connecticut volunteers, was returnable the next day. A return was accordingly made, setting forth that the President's proclamation suspending the habeas corpus, having just been received, the marshal found it necessary to decline giving up the prisoner. The judge accepted the return, and suspended further proceedings in the case.

It was stated that the War Department had made a modification of the President's proclamation suspending the habeas corpus act, so that

hereafter the civil courts would be allowed to take cognizance as heretofore of all cases for the discharge of minors improperly enlisted and illegally detained by the military authorities. No other change or modification was made in the proclamation during the year, so that at the end of 1863 the privileges of the writ were suspended as to all persons held by military authority except minors illegally enlisted.

HARCOURT, Admiral OCTAVIUS VERNON, an officer in the British navy, born December 26th, 1793, died at Swinton Park, Yorkshire, August 14th, 1863. He was a son of Dr. Edward Vernon, late Archbishop of York (who took the name of Harcourt, in 1831, on his coming to the estate of the last Earl Harcourt). He entered the navy in 1806 as midshipman of the "Tigre," under Captain B. Hallowell, in the expedition to Egypt and Alexandria, 1807; and saw much boat service on the Nile. He was present in the same ship at the blockade of Toulon, and destruction of the French line-of-battle-ships "Robuste" and "Lion," in 1809; and on the promotion of Captain Hallowell to his flag, followed him into the "Malta," and continued serving with him on the coast of Spain, and at the siege of Tarragona, until made a lieutenant in 1814. He was then appointed to the Mulgrave," was transferred to the "Amelia," and, after the battle of Waterloo, was sent with a major of the Tuscan army to summon the town of Porto Ferrajo. In 1820 he was promoted to the rank of Commander, serving successively upon the "Drake," "Carnation," "Britomart," and "Primrose," the latter vessel on the West India station; from which he returned to England with a freight of more than a million dollars; and, after acting as aide-de-camp to the

lord high admiral during the visit of his royal highness to the seaports, was promoted to the rank of captain, July 7th, 1827. In 1834 he was appointed to the "North Star," and was for a time employed on a survey of the coast of Central America. He became rearadmiral in July, 1854. Upon his marriage, in 1838, he took up his residence at Swinton Park, and soon after became magistrate for the north and west districts of Yorkshire; and in 1848 was high-sheriff. He was a man of great benevolence of character, and a benefactor of the Church, having built and endowed one near Masham, and another in Devonshire. He built a number of alms-houses for the benefit of the poor, beside contributing largely to the different schools in and near Masham.

HATHERTON, Rt. Hon. EDWARD JOHN LITTLETON, Lord, born March 18th, 1791, died at Teddesley Park, May 4th, 1863. He was the only son of Moreton Walhouse, Esq., of Hatherton, but on the death of his great uncle, Sir Edward Littleton, Bart., he inherited the estates and assumed the name of Littleton. He was educated at Rugby, graduating at Brasennose College, Oxford, and had barely attained his majority when, in 1812, he succeeded to the representation of Staffordshire.

The business habits of Mr. Littleton, his tact and good judgment, soon gained him a high station in the Commons, and he was long considered one of the best authorities on the forms and procedure of Parliament. He succeeded his uncle in the chairmanship of the Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal Company, an office he retained to his death. Mr. Littleton was a constant supporter of Catholic Emancipation, the advocacy of which measure for many years imperilled his seat. He was also one of the principal framers of the "wings" of the Catholic Relief Bill, as well as one of the promoters of the unsuccessful measure for the payment of the Catholic clergy. He was a supporter of Mr. Canning's short lived ministry, and on the accession of Lord Grey to the premiership, he immediately joined the whig party. Upon the passage of the measures of Reform, the Cabinet intrusted to him the difficult duty of planning the boundaries of the newly enfranchised towns and divisions of counties, and of extending the limits of the old parliamentary cities and boroughs, and with very few and immaterial modifications the suggested boundaries became the law of the land. On the dissolution of Parliament in 1835 he was again returned for South Stafford, and the same year was created a peer, by the title of Baron Hatherton, of Hatherton. In 1854 he was appointed Lordlieutenant of Staffordshire. During the Crimean War he devoted himself to the organization of the militia of his county, and latterly to the formation of Volunteer Rifle Corps. His hospitality was profuse, and he annually entertained public men of all parties and men of letters, together with many distinguished

foreigners visiting England; and no man of his rank took a deeper interest in the welfare of the working classes.

HEAT. An important revolution has been going on within the last few years in the philosophy of physics, which must have the effect of changing our fundamental conceptions of the nature and relations of force. The publication in London of Prof. Tyndall's new and admirable work on "Heat as a Mode of Motion," must be regarded as an important result of the prog"ress of thought in this direction, and the republication of this book in New York—as it is the first regular work upon this subject in America-by bringing forward the new views, and opening the general discussion, has a special interest at the present time.

Every reflecting student of physical science has no doubt been perplexed by the phrase "imponderable forms of matter," which is applied in our text books to heat, light, electricity, and magnetism. No one has proposed to rank chemical affinity in this category, or to consider the force which produces or resists motion as an imponderable. By this hypothesis agencies, which are closely allied, and unquestionably of a kindred nature, have been so completely separated as to involve the whole subject in absurdity, and prevent the progress of rational and consistent theory.

According to the old view, caloric is regarded as the substance of heat-as a subtile, imponderable matter which flows in and out of bodies, warming and cooling them according to its quantity. When heat disappears, the calorie is said to become "latent; as different bodies require different quantities of heat to raise them through the same degree of temperature, they are said to have different "capacities" for containing or holding the caloric fluid; while if a body becomes heated by rubbing, it is Lecause its latent heat is liberated by friction. So also with electricity. By friction of various bodies the equilibrium of the all-pervading "electric fluid" is supposed to be disturbed. When the glass plate of the electrical machine is rubbed by the cushion the effect is to draw up the "electric fluid" out of the earth, the "common reservoir," and when a circuit of wire becomes electrically active, it is because a "current" of the "electric fluid" is flowing round and round through the conductors. This old hypothesis has no doubt been of important service in its day. Before the time had come to perceive the true relations of these agencies, the best that could be done was to borrow the conception and language of fluids, and apply them to these subtile and mobile effects of force that had to be represented in some way. But the hypothesis was grossly material; caloric was regarded as matter, as truly and essentially as gold or iron. And as the fundamental modern conception of the chemical elements is that they cannot be transmuted one into the others, so the radical conception of the imponderables was that as each had an independent material

existence, they could not be transformed into each other This hypothesis being the very reverse of the fact, its dogmas have long offered a barrier to the true course of physical investigation.

It is now established that the forces possess none of the attributes of matter-they are not entities-substantive things, endowed with peculiar, persistent individual properties, but they are modes of motion, or forms of movement in common matter, and are convertible one into another. It has long been known, for example, that heat, as in the case of the steam engine, produces mechanical force, while mechanical force, as in the case of friction, produces heat. But in what way is the effect related to the cause? The old hypothesis assumes the intervention of a fluid, which, so long as its agency is entertained, blinds us to the simplicity of the facts. The new explanation says that the conception of the fluid is superfluous-that heat actually passes into mechanical motion, and mechanical motion actually passes into heat, or that there is a conversion of one into another. So with all the other forces known as "imponderables;" they are mutually convertible into one another-a fact which has been described by Mr. Grove, under the phrase “correlation of forces." In his able treatise upon this subject, which, we are glad to learn, is to be republished in this country, he gives a lucid account of the principle from which the following paragraphs are abridged.

The various affections of matter, which constitute the main objects of experimental physics -namely, heat, light, electricity, magnetism, chemical affinity, and motion, are all correlative, or have a reciprocal dependence. Neither, taken abstractly, can be said to be the essential cause of the others, but either may produce or be convertible into any of the others. Thus heat may mediately or immediately produce electricity, electricity may produce heat, and so of the rest, each merging itself as the force it produces becomes developed. The same must hold good of other forces, it being an irresistible inference from observed phenomena, that a force cannot originate otherwise than by the dissolution of some preëxisting force or forces. The term correlation, strictly interpreted, means a necessary mental or reciprocal dependence of two ideas inseparable even in mental conception; thus the idea of height cannot exist without involving the idea of depth; the idea of parent cannot exist without involving the idea of offspring. The probability is that, if not all, the greater number of physical phenomena are correlative, and that without a duality of conception the mind cannot form an idea of them. Thus matter and force are correlates in the strictest sense of the word; the conception of the existence of the one, involves the conception of the existence of the other. The correlation of forces implies their reciprocal production; that any force capable of producing another may, in its turn, be produced by

it-nay more, can be itself resisted by the force it produces in proportion to the energy of such production, as action is ever accompanied and resisted by reaction. Thus the action of an electro-magnetic machine is reacted upon by the magneto-electricity developed by the action. With regard to the forces of electricity and magnetism in a dynamic state, we cannot electrize a substance without magnetizing it-we cannot magnetize without electrizing it. Each molecule, the instant it is affected by one of these forces, is affected by the other, but in transverse directions; the forces are inseparable and mutually dependent; correlative, but not identical.

In many cases where one physical force is excited, all the others are also set in action. Thus, when a substance, such as sulphuret of antimony, is electrified, at the instant of electrization, it becomes magnetic in directions at right angles to the lines of electrical force; at the same time it becomes heated to an extent greater or less according to the intensity of the electric force. If this intensity is exalted to a certain point, the sulphuret becomes luminous, or light is produced; it expands, consequently motion is produced; and it is decomposed, therefore chemical action is produced.

Motion, the most obvious, the most distinctly conceived of all the affections of matter will directly produce heat and electricity, and electricity, being produced by it, will produce magnetism. Light also is readily produced by motion; either directly, as when accompanying the heat of friction, or immediately by electricity resulting from motion. In the decompositions and compositions which the terminal wires proceeding from the conductors of an electrical machine develop when immersed in different chemical media, we get the production of chemical affinity by electricity, of which motion is the initial source.

If heat be now taken as the starting point, we shall find that the other modes of force may be readily produced by it. Motion is so generally, if it be not invariably, the immediate effect of heat, that we may almost, if not entirely, resolve heat into motion, and view it as a mechanically repulsive force tending to more the particles of all bodies, or to separate them from each other. This molecular motion we may readily change into the motion of masses, or motion in its most ordinary and palpable form. Heat, then, being a force capable of producing motion, and motion, as we have also seen, being capable of producing the other modes of force, it necessarily follows that heat is capable immediately of producing them. It will immediately produce electricity, as shown in the beautiful experiment of Seabeck. With regard to chemical affinity and magnetism, perhaps the only method by which, in strictness, the force of heat may be said to produce them, is through the medium of electricity; the thermo-electric current being capable of deflecting the magnet, of magnetizing iron, and exhibiting the other

magnetic effects; and also of forming and decomposing chemical compounds.

But investigation has gone still further. It is found that all these changes take place in rigorous accordance with the laws of quantity. As matter cannot be destroyed, neither is force capable of destruction; and as matter may be pursued through all its multitudinous changes without loss, the same principle is found to hold in regard to force. It has long been familiarly known that machines do not create force, but only communicate, distribute, and apply that which is imparted to them. In all cases the force expended is exactly measured by the resistance overcome. In the case of water-power, to lift a hammer of 100 pounds one foot high at least 100 pounds of water must fall through one foot; or, what is the same thing, 200 pounds must fall through half a foot, or 50 pounds through two feet. If a hammer weighing 1,000 pounds is employed with the same driving force, it will either be raised to only onetenth the height, or, tenfold the time will be required to raise it the same height. Thus in machines a certain amount of power acting as cause, produces an exactly equal amount of change, as effect.

It is precisely the same when the molecular forces are involved-those forces which involve the agency of atoms. It is well understood that a certain amount of fuel is necessary to perform a given amount of work with a steam engine. This means, strictly, that definite quantities of the chemical action of combustion give rise to a fixed quantity of heat, and this to a determinate quantity of mechanical effect. Dr. Faraday made the important discovery of the definite chemical effect of the voltaic current. He found that an equivalent of an element consumed in a battery gives rise to a definite quantity of electricity which will produce exactly an equivalent of chemical decomposition. For example, the consumption of 32 grains of zinc in the battery excites a current which will set free from combination 1 grain of hydrogen, 104 of lead, 108 of silver, 39 of potassium, and 31:6 of copper. But these are the combining numbers of those elements, and thus is established a remarkable equivalency between chemical and electrical forces.

That a certain amount of heat produces a definite quantity of mechanical force has been long known; but only lately has the question been inverted: how much heat is produced by a certain amount of mechanical force? The answer to this question gives rise to the science of thermodynamics. All friction, collision, and condensation, whether of solids, fluids, or gases, produce heat. But to ascertain at what rate mechanical force produces heat it requires certain standards of comparison known as the units of heat and force. The English unit of heat is one pound of water, raised through 1° F. The unit of force is one avoirdupois pound falling through one foot of space. By a great

number of experiments, Dr. Joule of Manchester, Eng., demonstrated the mechanical equivalent of heat-that is, how many units of force are equal to a unit of heat. He agitated water, mercury, and oil successively in suitable vessels, by means of paddles driven by falling weights, and determined the exact amount of heat produced, and the force spent. By varied and repeated operations, conducted with consummate skill and great patience, he found that the same expenditure of power produced the same absolute amount of heat, whatever materials were used; and that a pound weight falling through 1 foot, and then arrested, would produce a unit of heat, that is sufficient to raise 1 lb. of water 1° F. The vast significance of this fact to science is obvious; every movement that takes place throughout the universe, whether of molecules or masses, has its fixed thermal value-it represents and may be converted into a definite amount of heat.

upen

The imponderables, then, have passed away, with the epicycles of the old astronomers and the phlogiston of the old alchemists-monuments of the past progress of thought—and we have in their stead pure forces which are all varying modes of motion of ordinary matter. Science assumes the atomic constitution of matter; that there are interspaces between the atoms, and that these atoms are capable of various motions, and are probably in a state of constant movement. They may rapidly oscillate backward and forward, or whirl their axes, or even revolve through orbits, like what we may term the larger atoms of the solar system. Perhaps they execute several of these movements at the same time as do the planets. They are also believed to be endowed with polarities, and that their motions are subject to a polar control. Each molecular force is regarded as a mode of motion among the atoms; and as these motions may pass into each other the forces are convertible. Heat is that mode of motion among atoms by which they are caused to move further apart, producing expansion of the mass, or heating it. As the motion declines the body contracts and cools. Heat is produced by friction or collision . because the mechanical motion which is arrested and disappears is changed to the molecular motion of the mass; while the mechanical motion produced by heat, as in the case of the steam-engine, is simply the consequence of the translation of atomic movement into massive motion. No force can be annihilated, and what the atoms lose, the mass gains.

Caloric, the electric fluid, and luminous corpuscles are denied; yet science still holds to the conception of a universal ether. Some writers, prominent among whom is Mr. Grove, protest against this as an inadmissible assumption. They say we can neither make nor prove the existence of a perfect vacuum, and, therefore, are not entitled to deny that matter is universal. There may be, and there probably is, matter, in some form, however attenuated,