The Coles County Rebels.

Our readers remember well the circumstances of the atrocious and murderous assaults made upon a number of veteran Union soldiers belonging to the 54th Illinois at Charleston, Illinois, in March last, in which a number of the soldiers, including the talented and patriotic Dr. York, were killed and several others more or less severely wounded. Every circumstance went to prove that the assailants of the soldiers had anticipated the collision and had made deliberate preparation for it, by collecting in the town in unusual numbers, arming themselves with revolvers or guns concealed in their wagons, etc. After their work of murder had been completed, and when compelled to leave the town by the approach of the body of the regiment from Mattoon, these men who, in wreaking their vengeance on Union soldiers, were influenced by the same motives which control the actions of rebels in arms against the Government, spread themselves over the country exciting their friends to treasonable resistance to the authorities. They gathered together to the authorities. They gathered together to the number of several hundred and for several days defied the constituted authorities, until they were convinced by the concentration of several regiments of troops in the vicinity, that the Government possessed the determination and the power to put down any outbreak, when the leaders generally attempted to escape from the country (many of the most guilty being successful) and their duped and deluded followers returned to their homes.

These men were, to all intents and purposes, as guilty of levying war against the Government, as the rebels of the South, whose allies they were. Yet, atrocious as were their crimes, and conclusive as were the proofs of their guilt, there were found newspapers in this State shameless enough to defend the perpetrators of these crimes against the peace of the community and the Government. Prominent among these apologists and defenders of such lawless acts were the Chicago Times and State Register — papers which omit no opportunity to undermine the power of the Government, and directly or indirectly give aid and comfort to the rebellion.

During the continuance or immediately after the insurrection in Coles county, a large number of persons who had been connected with the outbreak, either as principals or accomplices, were arrested. Twenty-nine of these men were brought to Camp Yates, near this city, where they were kept confined. Some weeks ago these men were examined by the Provost Marshal General of the State, and fourteen of the number were released on taking the oath of allegiance — it appearing that there was no conclusive proof against them of the commission of any overt act, or that they had been made the unsuspecting tools of others. The remaining fifteen were still held in custody to be dealt with by the authorities.

In view of the above, our readers will scarcely be surprised by the following misrepresentation of facts which appeared in the Register of yesterday morning:

THE COLES COUNTY RIOTERS. — On Thursday last Messrs. Hay and Ficklin, on the part of the men charged with complicity in the riot at Charleston, Ill., on the 28th of March last, made application before Judges Davis and Treat, of the United States circuit court, for a writ of habeas corpus, to bring before the court Bluford E. Brooks, and fifteen others, held at Camp Yates under the above named charge. The petition stated that the grand jury of Coles county had acted upon the cases of the men held in confinement, and had found bills for murder against two of them, and for riot against two others, and had ignored any bills against Bluford Brooks and the remaining ten. Also that the grand jury of the United States court had been discharged without finding bills against any of the parties.

Upon notice of this application being served upon Col. Oakes, Provost Marshal General for the State, he requested, as we understand, time to consult his superior officers, which was granted, but at the expiration of the time, instead of filling the proper answer, he exhibited an order from President Lincoln, and coolly informed the court that under that order the prisoners had been spirited away to Fort Delaware!

Then follows some vehement denunciations of the alleged usurpations and tyranny of the Government based upon the above misrepresentation of the facts. But it is not with the Register's rhodomontade that we propose to deal. We propose simply to give a brief history of the facts connected with the removal of the prisoners, and leave its idiotic ravings to the contempt of intelligent readers.

The history of the case, as briefly stated, is as follows: On Wednesday last (not Thursday, as stated by the Register) application for a writ of habeas corpus was made by the counsel of the prisoners, and a notice of the same was served on Col. Oakes the same evening. He immediately returned an informal answer in writing to the Court, (which was probably not read in Court until Thursday morning) stating that he held the prisoners under authority of Gen. Heintzelman, his superior in office and Commander of the Department, without whose permission he could not surrender them, and requested time to communicate with Gen. Heintzelman on the subject. He also assured the Court that there would be no unnecessary delay on his part in procuring an early answer. Time was granted him until Friday to make his return. The facts were immediately telegraphed to Gen. Heintzelman and instruction asked. Before, however, a reply had been received to the dispatch asking instructions, (viz: on Thursday morning,) an order was received from Gen. Heintzelman, dated several days previous, directing that the prisoners be sent to Cincinnati, forthwith, for trial by court martial. Still later in the day a dispatch was received from Gen. Heintzelman, stating that the dispatch in reference to the writ of habeas corpus has been referred to Washington. About noon on Friday another dispatch was received from Gen. H. embodying the instructions of Gen. Halleck, as Chief of Staff, which were to the effect that the President suspended the writ of habeas corpus in the case of the Coles county prisoners, and they were ordered to be sent to Fort Delaware on the first train. As soon as practicable, Col. Oakes prepared his return to the writ of habeas corpus, according to the instructions he had received. That his return was not made to the Court the same day was not his fault, but because the Court was not in session on Friday afternoon. Nevertheless, al care was taken to inform the prisoners' counsel and the Court of the nature of the return — and at two o'clock on Friday night the prisoners were sent forward according to orders.

It will thus be seen that, so far from the prisoners having been "spirited away," as charged, every step taken by Col. Oakes was carefully made known to the Court, even to the exhibition of his instructions. That he was not guilty a violation of law, is shown in the fact that the Court did not hold him for contempt as it assuredly would have done, if the facts were as charged by the Register, but his answer was pronounced sufficient. In this connection it is proper to say that Col. Oakes (to whom as well as to the Administration the Register's statement does gross injustice) has, during the whole of the time these prisoners have been under his charge, shown the utmost regard for their rights forwarding promptly to Department Headquarters, not merely the charges and testimony against them, but all affidavits, petitions and pleadings (and these have been numerous) in their behalf.

The prisoners are evidently held by the Government as prisoners of war, and as such not entitled to the benefits of the habeas corpus.