I believe that all the cases have been cited, either on the one side or the other, from the Reports of the Supreme Court of the United States, that have had to do with the question as to the political character of the revolted South American States. Those which were cited by my learned friend, Mr. Larocque, _The Josefa Segunda_ (5 _Wheaton_, 338), _The Bello Corunnes_ (6 _Wheaton_, 152), and _The Santissima Trinidad_ (7 _Wheaton_, 283), are all authorities, as we suppose, for the view which the Courts adopt, even when they are Courts of a neutral nation--that they follow the decisions of their Government as to the public quality and character of belligerents. Adjourned to Monday, 28 Oct., at 11 o'clock, A.M. FIFTH DAY. _October 28, 1861._ ARGUMENT OF MR. DUKES FOR THE DEFENCE. _Mr. Evarts_ said: Perhaps it is unnecessary that I should say to the Court and learned counsel, that I shall refer to the Statute of treason, as well as to the Constitutional provision as to treason. The Statute of treason is found in the first section of the Crimes Act of 1790. _Mr. Dukes_ said: _May it please your honors and gentlemen of the Jury._ It has been said by one of the most eminent statesmen that ever lived, that "civil wars strike deepest into the manners of the people,--they vitiate their politics; they corrupt their morals; they pervert the natural taste and relish of equity and justice." If this be so, one would think that this was a singularly unfortunate time for the Government to bring on the trial of these prisoners at your bar, who are entitled to that right which the Constitution offers to the meanest citizen--that of a fair and impartial trial. Is it to obtain that fair and impartial trial that the case is brought on now, when the flame of civil war lights the land, and when, in every stage and condition of society, the bitterest sentiments of hostility prevail? Is it in order to afford the prisoners a fair and impartial trial that the case is brought on now, when tender infancy and gentle woman unite with stern and selfish man in uttering the deepest imprecations on their enemies? Is it in order to obtain a fair and impartial trial that the case is brought on now, when, on God's holy day, in his holy temple, his chosen ministers officiating at his holy altar, utterly unmindful of the injunction of their meek and lowly Master, "to forgive their enemies, and to pray for those who despitefully use them"--offer up to Heaven prayers for its severest vengeance upon the heads of their enemies? If so, gentlemen, I beg at least, (as one of the counsel,) to offer my dissent.