That officer, having been sworn, stated, that on the
preceding night he had been intruded upon in his apartment
by a stranger, who could have obtained admission only
through the gate of the fortress, by which also he must
have made good his escape. That it was evident the prisoner
had been in correspondence with their enemies; since, on
proceeding to examine the gate it had been found unlocked,
while the confusion manifested by him on being accused,
satisfied all who were present of the enormity of his
guilt. Search had been made every where for the keys,
but without success.

The second charge was supported by presumptive evidence
alone; for although the governor swore to the disappearance
of his son, and the murder of his servant, and dwelt
emphatically on the fact of their having been forcibly
carried off with the connivance of the prisoner, still
there was no other proof of this, than the deductions
drawn from the circumstances already detailed. To meet
this difficulty, however, the third charge had been
framed.

In proof of this the governor stated, that the prisoner,
on being interrogated by him immediately subsequent to
his being relieved from his post, had evinced such
confusion and hesitation, as to leave no doubt whatever
of his guilt; that, influenced by the half promise of
communication, which the court had heard as well as
himself, he had suffered the trial of the prisoner to be