YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Full of illustrative engravings. .« "70 »Cm i-3 PS a o is W PS «PSt> QdsPhPSe cKPS PSoo b"wto o THE WHOLE COMPLETE IN THIS VOLUME. .THE TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AND CONSPIRATORS AT WASHINGTON, D. C, MAY AND JUNE, 1865. FOR THE MURDER OF PRESIDENT LINCOLN. JOHN WILKES BOOTH, THE MURDERER OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN. Being a full and verbatim Report of the Testimony of all the <$Stnesses examined in the whole Trial, with the Arguments of Counsel on both sides, ancWne Verdict of the Mili tary Commission; with a sketch of the Life of all the Conspirators, and Portraits and Illus trative Engravings of the principal persons and scenes relating to the foul murder and the trial. It also contains items of fact and interest not to be found in any other work of the kind published. The whole being prepared, on the spot, by the Special Correspondents and Reporters of the Philadelphia Daily Inquirer, expressly for this edition. y.<- f)l)ila&elpf)ta: T. B. PETERSON & BROTHERS, 306 CHESTNUT STREET. PRICE 50 CENTS. Cheapest place in the world to buy or send for books of all kinds, is at T. B. Peterson * Brothers. Send for their Catalogue. Booksellers, News Agents, Sutlers, and all others, will be supp)1 Quantities of any Books published, at t>*e lowest net cash prioe. on sending thei* " ** Tor a Lilt ot "Petersons' Pc Series. of Novels." _^_^^__ JteT Tie Books on this page will be found to be the very Best and Latest Publications ir< the world, and are Published and for Sale by T. B. PETEESON & BROTHERS, Philadalnut, MRS. HENRY WOOD'S BOOKS. I The Runaway Match, 59 \ A Life's Secret, - 50 I Better for Worse, - 75 | The Lost Bank Note, 75 The Earl's Heirs; or Lord Oakburn's Daugh ters,- - ;¦*&$ /¦-¦ 75 i The Mystery, - : -v 75 1 Abtfve ar« each, in ime volume, paper cover. Each one is also published iit one volume, cloth, price #1-00 each. The Channings,- - 1 00> | Aurora Floyd, - 59 The above are each in one volume, paper cover. Fine editions are also published In one vol., cloth, price #1.501 Oswald Cray, 1 50 j,The .Castle's Heir, 1 50 Squire Trcvlyn'a Ilelr; Shadow of A phlydyat, 2 50 or TrevlynlB Hold, 1 50 f VenrerV Pride, --' 1 50 The above are each in one volume paper cover. Each one is also published) in one volume, cloth, price #2.00. The Haunted Tower, 50*1 The Lawyer's Sceret, 25 Foggy Night at OffbrdV 25 J William All air, - 25 GUSTAVO AIMARD'S WORKS. The Prairie Flower, - The Indian Scout, Tlio Trail Hunter, ¦ fhe Indian Chief, • The, Red Track, ». Pirates of the Prairies, Trapper's Daughter, ->' The Tiger Slayer, ¦¦'- The Gold Seekers., - The Smuggler C5rfef, Ti75 75 7/575 MRS. DANIELS' GREAT BOOKS, Marrying for Money, The Poor Cousin, 73 I Kate Wale-iu ghanv, 50>] WILKIE COLLINS' BEST WORKS. The Crossed Path, - 1 50- 1 The Dead Secret, -15ft "-'The above ore- each in onevolumc, paper eover. Each, one is also* published) in- one volume, cloth, price Jj2i00v Hide and Seek, - - 75-1 The Stolen Marie. - 2* After Dark,. 75 -The Yellow Mask, - 25 The Dead Secret,. - 7»| Sisfier Rose, - '- 23 Sights-A-Fbot, or Travels Beyond Railways, - 50A MISS PARDOES WORKS. The Jealous Wife, - 50-1 The Wife's- Trials, * 75 Confessions of a Pretty Rival Beautfes, - - 75- Woman, 50-| Romauceof the Harem. 50= The five above hooks are- also bound! in> one vol. for S3 00> The- Adopted Heir. One vol.,, paper, JJH.501; or clothy 52.00- A Ufe's Struggle. By Mies Pacdoe, cloth, - - 2 00 G. P. R. JAMES'S. R00K& Lord Montagu's- Page, 1 50'| The Cavalfes, - - It 50* The aboveare each in one volume, paper eover. Each book is also publfcshedi in one volume, cloth, price #2.00. The Man In Black, - %$• 1 Arran, Nell', 75 Mary of Burgundy-, - 75*1 Eva-St Clahr, - - fifr G00B BOOKS FOR EVERYBODY. Lite ana AdvaatuBes of Dou Quixotte. - 1 00* Adventures in Africa. I 00 Adventures of Peregrine Fickle', 2 voIb., - I 00 Adventures of Torn Jones, 2 vols., - - - 1 00 Afternoon of Unmarried Lite*,- - - - l 50 .....-,. and B9aut.es of Fanny Fern, - - 1 50 Lady Maud ; or the Wonder of Kings wood Chase, The above are each In one volume, papercover. Each one is also published In-one volume, cloth, prlce-$2,.00,each- HUMOROUS AMERICAN WORKS. BEAUTIFULLY ILLUSTRATE!* Major Jones* Courtship. Major Jones* Travel*, Stmiou Sugge's Adven- tu red. and Travels, ft'uijM Jones.' Chronicle* Lola Montcz Lift-, I SO- C"f«rLMe, - - l 50- Wild Southern Scenesy 1 50> The Quaker Soldier, l fi(^ Rumor* FalconbricEge, 1 SO1 Secession, Coercion. and Civil War, - 1 50 What I saw I and Wheue I Went, - - - 1 00 Life and Adventures of Wilfred Montressor, 1 50 75- of riueville, folly Peahlossom'i Wedding, 75 Widow Rugby's tlus- Land, - - /5 Bus lU-ar of Arkansas,. 75 We .t< m Scenes, or Life oti the Prairie, 75 S i rcftke Squatter Life, 75 Tickings- from Picayune, 75 Stray Subject*, arrested and, [i)ounuvQvert - - 75 Louiilapft'B^amp Doc- ' -tor, . 75 Charcoal Sketches, - 75 M'jsff>« l.u»(-s ]*i't-'r ' a\>er, 75 v.k-Q -among the '¦ laldsv - - -, %5 Weani Sketch . •- ,. 75 Drama* in Ft>kervrtt», 75- The Qnorndon Hounds, 75 My Shooting Box, - 75 Warwick Woodlands, 75 The Deer Stalkers, - 7* Peter Ploddy, - - 75. Adventures , of Cap tain- Farrago, 75- Major O*ftegaor» A*- venture^ 7* Sol. Smith's Theatri cal Apprenticeship, 75 Sol. Smith**- Theatre cal Journey- Work,- 75- The Quarter Race iti Kentucky, 75 Ufe-pf:iCol. Vander* bombj • - - - 7ft PercIvalMhyberrv's Ad ventures and'TrarelE, ?5 Vtinii.^ Yarn* wnd Y-iuk.f Jitters, - 75 Am«ir-an Jo*. Miller, 59' Adventures of F^^e Fumble* - - ' - 75 DISRAELI'S WORK? Henrietta Temple. Vivian; Grey, - * Venetian - ¦«¦*<. 50 Young Duke - Miriam Ahw, CoutaffiaacFkiD&tfr . 005& FRANK FAIRLEGH'S WORKS. France Faiarlegfe, - - 7S>\ Fortunes ©*' Btwry Lewls- Aru-ndel, - - 75 1 Backet Scapegrace, TS Fine editions o£ above are Issued fu clo*b,.at $2 00 each. Harry Coverdaile'a Court- I Lorrin»erLittlego©d,- 1 50> (jMp,^ L50, or cloth, 2 00 | or in eloth, - 2 00- 0. J. PETERSOH'S WORKS. €Sd Stone Mansion, - 1 50- 1 Kate Aylesfo.d,- 2 59 -The above are each in one vol., pane? covt r. Each one fs-aisa'pub-lfohed in one volume, cloth, price $2.00 each. Cruising in Last Was, 5ft I Grace- Dudley ; er Ar- Yadiey Farm, - - 25 [ neid at Saratoga, - 25- MAITLAKB'S WORKS, Tb* Watchman, 1 50"] Diary of an Ol I Doctor I 5» Tlie Wanderer, ^ - 1 50/ Savtaroe, - - - _ 5° The Lawyer's Sitozy 1 50- (i The Three Cousins-, - a. i» Above are each in one vol., paper cover. Each ettu is alsopnWfthedlin one vol. eioth, price $2.fXremch. LANGUAGES WITK0UT MASTER French without Master, 25 I German without a Spanish, without a | Master, - 25 Mlasteiv - -25-1 Italian witlxut a Latin without a Master. 2& f Master, - 25 The above ftve works on the French, GerMian, Spanish, Latin and Italian Languages, without a Mr«t»r, whereby saiy due. or allnof these Languages ean be 1 earned by auy one without at Teacher, with the aid of this great book, by A. !£. Monteith, Esq., is also published in finer styley complete rw cue large volume, boubdj'Vxjjgce. $&.&>. BOOKS OF FUN AND STUMOR. Each one fuir of Iltitatra6iatt9, andboun.i in Cluilk Hi?h Life in New York, by, Jonathan Slick, 2 00 JucEge-. Halliburtou'e Yankee Stories, il lustrated, cloth, The Swftjip Doctor'o Adventures in the South- Vfest- 14 ii- lustrations, olothv - Major Thorpe 'e See nes iu Arkansaw, 16- il- histratious, eloth, - The Big Bear's Ad ven tures and Travels. 18 eng-rsjvings, cloth Hairry Coverdale's Courtships cloth, - American- Joe Miller, - 200* »-00 50» Pkiey Woods Tsweni, or, San* M'ck ia Texas, clot * , Major Jones , 2 Hivt- ship ami Trft-Jifls. Illustrated, cwi'--, - Simon Suggn* .Wen- tuves and Travels. Illustrated., ciath, - Major Jones's Scenes fu Georgfa cloth, - Sam Slick, tie Clock- maker, eroih, - TheHumoss >*'F«ticoD- bridge, cioth, - Frank Fwresftar's Sporthig Sv-encs and Cnaracters, 2 vo!*s usband>, S» The- Grumbler, 73 Nan Dan-ell, fW Ellen Wareham, - 38 Prince amd Pedflar-, - 38 Who Shall ba Heir? - 38- Merchant's Daug2vte>f m Secret Fee, 33- - The S%uiro, 8* Expcctant, - Sd> ETIQUETTE AND USEFUL BOOKS. The Ladles- Guide to- True PblHeuese an* Perfect Manners. By Miss Leslie. Cloth, full gilt beck, $00 The Ladles Complete Guide to Needlework Mii , Embrpldery. 113 illustration*. Cloth, gilt back, 3 00 Ladies Work.Tablo Book, plated, olot! winwow g;iH t 50 The Gentleriwu'i Science of Etiquette. - - ¦ - 25 The Ladies Science of Eticuiette-, . - - - 25 Creation of the Earth, .- ' * - - *- - - S 00 The- Laws *md Practice of the Gome of iBuclwe, - 1 W I*nrd\tcr's( j? Thoa«awlT«n Things Woi- .(.!.£ ?¦ Kno\vison'a Complete Farrier; or Horse Doc vj; „i K:iu\rlson's <"'oinnlo;e Cow or Cattle Doc>tu - Si The Ootniplete- KHuhen aod Frwit Garder. .^, - *jft The Complete Florist andi Flov^r'Gfcrde -V^" " . ,& Arthur's Rccef'**- f^r- > - ig Frutts, uu> * iH ny pf t>iAabove worlrs xn\ Compete' and Unabridged Edition,— Containing the whole of the Suppressed Evidence. THE TRIAL OF THE ALLEGED ASSASSINS AND CONSPIRATORS AT WASHINGTON CITY, D. C, MAY AND JUNE, 1865. , FOR THE MURDER OF PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN. FULL' OF ILLUSTRATIVE ENGRAVINGS, Being a full and verbatim Report of the Testimony, of all the Witnesses examined in the whole Trial, with the Argument of Reverdy Johnson on the Jurisdiction of the Commission, and all the Arguments of Counsel on both sides, with the closing Argument of Hon. John A. Bingham, Special Judge Advocate, as well as the Verdict of the Military Commission; with a sketch of the Life of all the Conspirators, and Portraits and Illus trative Engravings of the principal persons and scenes relating to the foul murder and the triaL It also contains items of fact and interest not to be found in any other work of the kind published. The whole being com plete and unabridged in this volume, being prepared on the spot by the Special Correspondents and Eeporters of the Philadelphia Daily Inquirer, expressly for this edition. V Pl)ilabclpl)ta: T. B. PETERSON & BROTHERS, 306 CHESTNUT STBEET, , t Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1865, by T. B. PETERSON & BROTHERS, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United Spates, in and for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. •THE TEIAL OF THE ALLEGED Assassins and Conspirators. THE COURT MARTIAL. On the first of May, 1865, Presi dent Johnson issued the following order for the trial of the criminals : Executive Chamber, ) Washington City, May 1, 1865. J Whereas the Attorney General of the United States has given his opinion that the persons implicated in the murder of the late President, Abra ham Lincoln, and the attempted assassination of the Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, and an alleged conspiracy to assassinate other officers of the Federal Govern ment at Washington city, and their aiders and abettors are subject to the jurisdiction of and legally triable "before a military commission : It is ordered : First — That the As sistant Adjutant General detail nine competent military officers to serve as a commission for the trial of said parties, and that the Judge Advocate General proceed to prefer charges against said parties for their alleged offences, and bring them to trial be fore said military commission ; that said trial or trials be conducted by the said Judge Advocate General, as recorder thereof, in person, aided by such assistant or special judge advo cates as he may designate, and that said trials be conducted with all dili gence consistent with the ends of jus tice, and said commission to sit with out regard to hours. Second — That Brevet Major Gene ral Hartranft be assigned to duty as Special Provost Marshal General, for the purpose of said trial and attend- , ance upon said commission, and the execution of its mandates. Third — That the said commission establish such order or rules^ of pro ceeding as may avoid unnecessary delay and conduce to the ends of pub lic justice. ANDREW JOHNSON. Adjutant General's Office,) Washington, D. O, May 6, 1865. j Official Copy: W. A. Nichols, Assistant Adjutant General. In compliance with this order the following officers were detailed as members of the military commission : PRESIDENT. Major General David Hunter. MEMBERS. Major General Lew. Wallace, Brev. Maj. Gen. August V. Kautz, • Brig. Gen. Albion P. Howe, Brig. Gen. Robert S. Foster, Brig. Gen. James A. Ekin, Brig. Gen. Thomas M. Harris, Col. Charles H. Tompkins, Brevet Col. D. R. Clendenin. The prosecution was conducted by Brigadier General Joseph Holt, Judge Advocate General ; assistedjjy Brevet Colonel H. L. Burnett, of Indiana, and Hon. John A. Bingham, of Ohio, Assistant Judge Advocates. The prisoners selected for their counsel, Reverdt Johnson, of Mary land, Thomas Ewing, of Kansas, W. E. Doster, of Pennsylvania, Fred. A. Aikin, District of Columbia, Walter S. Cox, John W. Clampit, and F. Stone, of Maryland. The commission was composed of men of distinguished ability and in telligence. General Hunter is known as a man of superior attainments, and had served on a large number of Courts (15) 16 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Martial. Majol General Lew. Wal lace is not o^ly^onjf of^ the most[gal- lant officers in the army, but he is also a lawyer of great eminence, ranking among the first legal minds at' the bar of his' native State, Indiana. He was originally Colonel of the celebrated 11th "Indiana Zouaves, and Was pro moted to Brigadier General, and af terward to Major General, for gal lantry in the field. At present he commands the Middle Department, headquarters at Baltimore, a position which he has held for nearly two years. General Kautz is the celebrated Cav alry leader, and a man of great deci sion of character. Brigadier General Foster, of Indiana, Brigadier General Howe, of Maine, Brigadier General Harris, General EkiN, and Colonels Tomkins and Clendenin are soldiers who have won most honorable dis tinction in the service during the past four years. Hon. Joseph Holt, Judge Advo cate General of the United States, needs no eulogy. His reputation as a lawyer is known throughout the nation. He was abjy assisted by As sistant Judge Advocate BinghAm, of Ohio, and Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett, of Indiana, the latter gen tleman having conducted the prosecu tion of the famous Indiana conspira tors, who were found guilty of treason and sentenced to death, but who ulti mately had their sentences commuted to imprisonment for life in the Ohio Penitentiary. Hon. Reverdy Johnson, of Mary land, has a national reputation for legal acumen, and was selected by Mrs* Surratt as her counsel. His argument against the right of the Government to try the prisoners by Court Martial is an ingenious effort. Of the remaining gentlemen defend ing the accused little is known outside the immediate localities where they practice their profession. LABORS OP THE COMMISSION. " The following interesting items will give the public some idea of the labor imposed on the Commission : Total number of witnesses subpoe naed, , . . . . . 483 Number examined, . . .361 Number examined, Including re- i calls, - . y ± ¦ ¦ 422 "Number examined", subpoenaed for prosecution, .... 247 Number actually examined, .198 Number subpoenaed for defence, . .236 Number actually examined, . 1^3 Total number of pages of testi mony, legal cap, . • 4M0Q Making a solid pile of MSS. some what over 26 inches in height . The arguments make in addition, TOO pages. The yast mass of depo sitions, &c, taken by three Judge Advocates, ^Colonels, Burnett, Fos ter and Olcott, prior to the / opening of the case, employed five short-hand writers a fortnight, ' and ' will require two experienced clerks six weeks to brief and file away. In this, as in all State trials, the Government pays the expenses of. the witnesses for the der fence, as well as those for the prose cution, at the rate of $3 per. diem, and the actual cost of transportation from and to the witnesses' homes. Justice is always sure, sooner or later, to overtake the murderer. For a brief time he may elude the pursu ing fate, and perhaps, as it has often been the case, he may cover up for years his footsteps and be lost to tha keen scent of the avenger. But the day must come, when he will meet his deserts. God's eye watches him, and when the hour arrives, the murderer is exposed and justice is at last satis fied. In the case of the assassins of Presi dent Lincoln and Secretary Seward, the criminals were brought, either to a speedy death or arrest. Their plans of escape were well laid and promised success. The first great danger was passed when Booth and Payne made good their escape from the theatre and from Mr. Seward's house. So far all seemed well ; but Booth's fall on the stagey which broke his leg, sealed his fate certainly. It was decreed that he should not long elude the swift punishment due his horrible crime — a crjme for which there is no name. Payne thrown from his horse, found himself in the limits of the city, and in disguise sought the house of Mrs. Surratt. The ministers of justice TRIAL OF THE 'ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 17 were there before him, and he fell into their hands unwittingly, though un willingly, a couple of days after the assassination. Harold followed Booth, and proved a coward in the last act of the tragedy in' which his principal died the death of a dog ; and, begging for life, sur rendered. Geo. A. Atzeroth, Michael O'Lough- ]in; Samuel Arnold, Samuel E. Mudd, and Mary E. Surratt were also, duly arrested as accessaries to the villainous plot, and confined in prison to await their trial, which is fully reported in the succeeding pages. Sketches of the Culprits. Although justice decided that Booth should not be brought to formal trial, ft is not foreign to the history of the great trial of the conspirators, that a sketch of the principal actor in the tragedy which amazed the world, should be given in this work. John Wilkes Booth. Booth was born on his father's farm near Baltimore. Like his two bro thers, Edwin and Junius Brutus, he inherited and early manifested a pre dilection for the stage, and was well known to theatre-goers and the public generally as a very fine-looking young man, but as an actor of more promise than performance. He is best remembered, perhaps, in "Richard," which he played closely after his father's conception of that character, and by his admirers was considered superior to the elder Booth. He was quite popular in the Western and Southern cities, and his last extended engagement was in Chicago. Excellent actors say — and actors are not over-apt to praise each other — that he had inherited some of the most brilliant qualities of his father's genius. But, of late, an apparently incurable bronchial affection made almost every engagement of his a failure. The papers and critics apolo gized for iris " hoarseness,'.' but it was long known by his friends that he would be compelled to abandon the stage. In the winter of 1863 and '64 he played an engagement in the St. Charles Theatre, in New Orleans, un der the disadvantages of his " hoarse ness," and the engagement termina ted sooner than was expected.on that account. He had many old friends in that city, but this was his first ap pearance there since the inception of the rebellion. On his arrival he called upon the editor of one of the leading journals, and in the course of conver sation he warmly expressed his sym pathy with secession. Indeed, he was well known as a secessionist, but he was not one of the "noisy kind." His last appearance in New York was on the evening of November 23, 1864, at Winter Garden, when the play of Julius Gmsar was given for . the benefit of the Shakspeare Monu ment Fund, with' a cast including the three Booth brothers — Edwin as "Brutus," Junius as " Cassius," and John Wilkes as* "Marc Antony." In the early part of 1863, during an engagement at McVicker's Theatre, Chicago, he made the" remark one day,' " What a glorious opportunity there is for a man to immortalize himself by killing Lincoln !" "What good would that do?" he was asked. He then quoted these lines :— - " The ambitions youth who fired the Ephesian dome, Outlives in fame the piauslool who reared it." "Well, who was that ambitious > youth — what was his name ?" was then asked. " That I know not," Booth replied. " Then where's the fame you speak of?" This nonplussed him. From this it would seem that the; assassin had the commission of this horrid crime in hia mind for at least two or three years. He was a young man of slender form, nervous and wiry. He often, rendered himself obnoxious in the theatrical circles by the expression of his disloyal sentiments, and was a great admirer of Bjutus, the assassin of Caesar, Charlotte Corday, the as sassin of Marat, Joan of Arc, and that class of historical characters. H,e was subject to occasional sprees of intoxication, and was generally regarded among actors as a reckless 18 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. and erratic young fellow, though a tragedian of superior ability, origi nality and promised Lewis Payne. A great mystery envelopes this man . — a mystery -which seems impenetrar ble. As the assassin who attempted the life of Secretary Seward, more than ordinary interest was attached to the testimony affecting his case. Who h.e is no one appeared to know on the trial. The nearest approach to any thing satisfactory is, that he is the son of a Rev. Mr. Powell, a Baptist min ister, . residing in Florida; but even this is not positively ascertained. Miss Brandon, a witness, produced in his /[behalf, remembered him as a nurse in one of the hospitals after, the battle of Gettysburg. He then went by the name of Powell ; but, early in 1865, while boarding with Mrs. Brandon's mother, in Baltimore, he assumed the name of Payne. « During the progress of the trial he remained apparently indifferent to all around, and was possessed of a most extraordinary control over his,feelings. He maintained a dogged and sullen demeanor throughout ;• and when the colored waiter at Mr. Seward's was placed upon the witness stand, Payne was directed to stand up and face the witness. Both looked steadily at each other for a few moments, when the colored boy pointed to Payne, saying, " that is the man!" This positive recognition did not in the least discon cert the prisoner. But when Sergeant George B. Robinson, the nurse at Mr. Seward's, was called, and Payne was again directed to stand up and look at the witness while he detailed the cir cumstances attending the attempted murder, the prisoner grew red in the face at the recital of Robinson, par ticularly while he held in his hand the knife which Payne used on the occa sion, and gave a demonstration of the manner in which the assassin had struck at- the defenceless man as he lay upon his sick bed. The court-room was almost, breath less at this moment, every eye being turned upon the prisoner, to read in. his countenance g^jie confirmation of the truth of the witness' statement ; but he not so much as stirred. His wild stare was fixed upon, the witness. His mouth was closed tightly, as if his teeth were firmly clenched together, and he stood up as straight as a statue, with » no ,sign, of fear, trembling, or trepidation. Two coats worn by Payne on the night of the attempted murder were produced. The irons were taken from Payne's wrists, and he was directed to put on both coats and the hat which he dropped at the Secretary's house when he fled. The colored, boy was again brought in, and Payne stood up, dressed in the clothes he wore on that night, and he again identified Payne as the man who forced himself into Mr. Seward's house while in this dress. Facing the witness, Payne would occa sionally betray a sneering'defiant smilej and looked like a perfect desperado. Major Seward, son of the Secretary, also positively identified Payne as the man who entered his father's, house» and, in a "tone of deep emotion, nar rated the incidents of the stabbing of his father and brother, and pointed to Payne as the man who did it.- He was positive as to his identity, and the counsel for the prisoner, after a short cross-examination, desisted, as a refu tation of this evidence was hopeless. The sleeve of the woolen shirt which Payne had improvised into a skull cap on the night he visited Mrs. Surratt's house, and the pickaxe he carried, were exhibited. The sleeve was put on Payne's head, and he was fully identified by the re spective officers as the man* who at tempted to pass himself off as a labor ing man when he was arrested by the detectives at Mrs. Surratt's. The boots he wore on that night were also given in evidence, arid it was shown that the name originally inside of them had been blotted out to prevent identification, but being experimented upon with oxalic acid, the name of "J. W. Booth'j appeared. This com pleted the chain of evidence connect ing Payne with Booth. An attempt was made by.his coun sel to prove him insane ; but a rigid examination, under direction of Sur geon General Barnes, furnished con clusive evidence of his sanity. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 19 The testimony against him during jfche trial brought out the fact that' he was employed by the rebel plotters who had taken refuge in Canada to assassinate Secretary Seward. He was a fit .tool for these persons — Bev. Tucker, Geo. N. Sanders, C. C. Clay, Jacob Thompson, W. N. Cleary, et al. Booth succeeded, but, thanks to kind Providence, Payne failed. If Abraham Lincoln was to be the Martyr, Wm. H. Seward, his trusty counselor and friend, was to live and •behold the triumph of our cause. Payne went on to play his part in the work on the 4th of March, but as the scheme was postponed, he found his- way to the house of Mrs. Surratt. At her house he passed un der the name of Wood. The part which he enacted in the assassination plot is explained in*the testimony given during the triaL Payne\ is a bad looking man, tall and of huge proportions, neck bare, face smoothly shaven, a shock of black hair over a low forehead, and fierce eyes with small corner, around which the white is always disagreeably visi ble. He leans his head straight back against the wall, and when looked at, glares the looker out of countenance. David C. Harold. Harold, the accomplice of Booth in the assassination of President Lin coln, is not over twenty-three years of age. He was born in Maryland, and received his education at Char lotte JIall, in St. Mary's County. His father, a most estimable man, resided for many years in Washington, and hel<£l;he position of principal clerk in' the Naval store. Young Harold was perfectly acquainted with the topo graphy of the lower portion of the State, lying between the Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac River, and made "an excellent guide for Booth, with whom he was on most intimate terms for several months previous to the assassination. Harold led a very dissipated life, and was notoriously indolent, while it was a matter of gene ral surprise how* he obtained means to live. It is probable now that money was furnished him from the secret service fund of the Rebel Government, as well as to Booth, Payne and the other conspirators. Harold is an inveterate talker, and a great coward, as his anxiety to sur render when in Garrett's barn suffi ciently proves. Since his capture- he has been talkative and reticent by turns, and although wearing generally an indifferent air while in court, when in his. cell he frequently gives way to fits of weeping. John H. Surratt. Surratt, the son of Mrs. Surratt, and one of the principal conspirators, made his escape, leaving Washington the morning after the murder, at 6.15 A. M., going via Philadelphia and New York to Springfield, Mass., where he was delayed by trains missing con nection, and remained all day. He then took the cars and went direct to Burlington, where, in getting his supper, he dropped his handker- otief with his name marked upon it ; at St. Alban's he left the train and proceeded on foot to Canada, where he went part way by rail and part on foot to Montreal, where he was secre ted by some of the sympathisers, and on the morning of the 2d of May, he had an interview with George N. San ders. He then left and went in the direction of a monastery. He was known to be in that vicinity that day, and cannot since be found or heard of. It is probable that he is within its walls. Mis. Mary E. Surratt. Mrs. Mary E. Surratt is the mother of John H. Surratt, and the evidence adduced during the trial, proves her to have been one of the most active and energetic of the con spirators. There is no doubt but that she aided them in every manner in her power. She had the carbines pre pared and the bottles of whisky ready for Booth and HfLrold when they arri ved at her old tavern in their flight. She is a woman of great nerve and energy, and an out and out rebel at heart. Mrs. Surratt is a Marylander, about forty-five or forty-eight years of age. Mrs. Surratt shut up her house after the murder, and waited with her daughters till the officers came. She 20 TRIAfc OFAfHE ASSASSINS A*T WASHINGTON. was imperturbable and rebuked her girls for weeping, and would have gone to jail like a statue, but that in her extremity Payne knocked at her door. He had come, he Said, to dig a ditch for Mrs. Suri'att, whom he very well knew. But Mrs. Surratt protested that she had never seen the man at all, and had no ditch to clean. "How fortunate, girls," she said, " that these officers are here ; this man might have murdered- us all 1" Her effrontery Stamps her as, worthy of 6ompaniohship with Booth. Samuel A. Mudd. Samuel A. MuDD is the person who set Booth's leg. Mudd lives in Mary land, about three miles from Bryan- town, and has been known through the war as a strong sympathizer with the Rebellion. Geo. A. Atzeroth. Atzeroth, who was to murder Mr. Johnson, is a vulgar-looking creature, but not apparently ferocious ; combat- iveness is large, but in the region of firmness his head is lacking where Payne's is immense. He has a pro truding jaw, and mustache turned up at the end, and a short, insignificant looking face. He is just the man to promise to commit a murder and then fail on coming to the point. Mrs. Sur ratt. calls him a " stick," and she is probably right. , Atzeroth was captured during the week which succeeded .the crime, and was taken to Washington. He had a room almost directly over Mr. John son's. He had all the materials to do murder, but lost spirit or opportunity. He ran away so hastily that all his arms and baggage were discovered ; a tremendous bowie-knife and a Colt's cavalry revolver were found between the mattresses of his bed. Booth's coat was also found there, showing conspired flight in company, and in it three boxes of cartridges, a map of Maryland, gauntlets for riding, a spur, and a handkerchief marked with the name of Booth's mother — a mother's souvenir for a murderer's pocket ! At zeroth fled alone, and was found at the house of his uncle in Montgomery county. Edward Spangler. Spangler appears to have been Booth's right hand man during the awful scene at the theatre. Spang ler was employed as the carpenter of the theatre. He is about forty years of age and of a mild looking face. Samuel Arnold. Arnold is a native, of Maryland, and originally entered the plot to carry off President Lincoln and im mure him in some out of the way house or take him to Richmond. He seems to have hesitated about com mitting murder and was anxious fos Booth to get the consent of Jeff. Davis to the crime, before he lent it his countenance. He is a young man of some 28 years of age and of medium height. Sam. Arnold (who was arrested at Fortress Monroe), as well as other witnesses, states that one plan was to capture Mr. Lincoln some night be tween the War Department and White House* where he was accustomed to go alone late at night. He was then to be hurried down through the gar den of the White House, thence to what is known as the old Van Ness house on Seventeenth street, near the confluence of Tyber and Potomac rivers. This house is built near the old homestead of David Burns, a Scotch man, whose plantation embraced about one-third of Washington City. He grew rich from the sales of land. About the year 1820, General Van Ness built a house on the old home stead. "It is a large brick commo dious house, two stories and a half high. <. The partition walls all run to the same depth as "cellar walls. At some subsequent period the cellars made by these walls .were dug out, and one of them has a trap door going down through the floor, and was for merly used for a wine cellar Another was used for a slave prison, and still another for an ice house. -^ On the death of Van Ness, fifteen years ago, it was sold to one Thomas Green, who owned the Warrenton Springs in Virginia. Green's sons were all in the rebel army. Trial of the assassins at Washington. 21- Had they been able to have gotten Mr. Lincoln across the Potomac and into Moseby's> hands, all well. But if not then he could have been secreted in this house. There are about two acres around the house filled with high trees and close shrubbery, with a high brick wall along the street, shutting the house from the street, and any cries from it would be effectually drowned long before reaching the street. Several times during the war was this house an object of suspicion, and several arrests were made there, but not until the murder were the secret vaults and passages found and the character of the place ascertained. Michael O'Loughlin. O'Loughltn was designated to be the assassin of Lieut.-Genl. Grant. He has much of Booth's appearance. with black hair, mustache and im perial. He does not look like one who would be selected for such desperate work. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AM) CONSPIRATORS. A Description of the Conspirators. KETEEDY JOHNSON AND GEN. HARRIS. Examiaatioa of* Witnesses THE TESTIMONY IN" DETAIL. Washington, May 13.— The court is held at the Old Penitentiary, in an upper room, white waned, with two windows east and north. These windows are ironed with flat bars aiong the wall. On the west side, on raised seats, were Dr. Mudd, David C. Harold, Lewis Payne, Edward Spangler, of Ford's Theatre, Michael O. Leugh- lin, Atzeroth and Samuel Arnold. Sitting out side the paling was Mrs. Surratt, leaning on a small green-baized table. Beyond her, on the other side of the table, near the northern win dows, sat the counsel for the accused, Thomas Ewing, son of the Ohio e"x-Senator, Attorney Stones Walter S. Cox, Reverdy Johnson, Aiken andClampet. ' Running east and west) beside the northern waU, there is a long table, also covered with green baize. At this sit the Court. Dr. Mudd looked cal m^ collected and atten tive1, leaning on the railing that surrounded him as if to relieve his wristsfrom the weight of the handuffs that encumbered them. Arnold was restless, raising his hand to his hair with a nervous twitching, and constantly varying the direction of his looks,now glancing from face to face, then bowing his head on his hand, which was supported on his knees. His handcuffs were somewhat peculiar, not being connected asusualpy a chain, but by abar about eight inches Jn length. Payne, dressed in grey woolen shirt and dark pants, seemed more intent in trying to obtain a lull view of the sunny landscape through the barred windows than of confining his attention to the details of the proceedings. As he looked', astrange, listless dreaminess pervaded his face. His dark hair, irregularly parted, hung over his forehead and often clouded his dark blue eyes. His thick, somewhat protruding lips were as if glued together. His legs Were crossed, and his ironed hands rested on the knee of the upper one. Laughlin was observant of every move in the Court. He leaned back, with his head against the wall, fully exposing his broad but not high forehead, crowned with a full bushy head of black hair. ^.tzeroth, a man some five feet six or seven inches in height^ might have been taken, had it not been for his manacles, as a mere spectator. He possesses a' style of face most common in southern Germany, though his beard and hair are of a reddish sand color, and his eyes light. A police officer sat beside each prisoner. Mrs. Surratt has already been correctly de- , scribed; a stout, buxom widow, fitting FalstaffTs ideal, fair, fat and forty; although it is , as certained she is ifar beyond that period of life, having nearly reached her grand climac- tric. * She was dressed in black, and looked a little flushed, but we failed to notice that cold, cruel gleam in her grey eyes, which some of the gentlemen of the press have attributed to her. The court engaged in the trial of the conspira tors altered one of its rules to-day, so as to admit reporters for the press, Hon. Beverdy Johnson appeared as counsel for Mrs. Surratt, whereupon' an objection was raised to him by General Har ris, ana which was withdrawn after an earnest debate on both sides. Detectives Lee and the clerk of the Kirkwood House, and the present proprietor of the house heretofore occupied by the Surratt family and others, were examined with reference to, thfs house, and in relation to arms having been de posited there in order to facilitate the escape of the assassins. The court was in session until a late hour. An Objection to Reverdy Johnson. The first testimony taken in the case of the several parties arraigned, was a portion of that which the Governmerit deems it necessary for the present to withhold from the public, when that testimony ha,d ail been rendered, Brigadiet- GeneralT. M. Harris stated that Be*oSe<*o ob ject to the admission of Mr. Reverdy Johnson as a counsel pleading before the Court, and thathe did this upon the ground that in an opinion de livered by Mr. Johnson, that gentleman had ex pressed his disregard of the sane ti ty of an oath. General Harris then stated that he referred tb the opinion expressed in a letter written by Mr. Johnson at the time of the Maryland Convention held with reference to the adoption of the new constitution of that State. 22 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT 'WASHINGTON. M"r. Johnson's Reply. - viir, Johnston replied as follows:— It is' difficult' to speak to that objection; to speak as I feel, without having that opinion before me. That Opinion cannot be, tortured by any reasonable man to any such conclu sions. There is not ainember of this Court, either the President or the member who objects, who recognizes the obligation of an oath more absolutely than I do, and there is nothing in my life, from the commence ment to the present time, which would induce me for a moment to avoid a comparison in all moral respects between myself and any member of thisOourt. In this Rebellion, which has broken down so many moral principles; it has been my pride to stand by the Go vernment from the beginning to the present moment. and to take every obligation which the Government thought it necessary to impose, and to do my duty faithfully in every department of the public service as well as in my individual capacity. If such an objection was made in the Senate of the United States, where I .am known, I forbear to say now it would be treated, because I know the terms in which it would be decided. I have too long gone through^ too many trialSj and rendered the country such services as my abilities enabled me, and.the votes of the people in whose midst I am living,- for hre, particularly, to tolerate for a moment, -come from ^ whom it may, such an aspersion on my moral charac ter. I am glad it is made now when I have arrived at that period of life when it would be unfit to notice it in any other way; but I repeat there.isnotonewordof truth in the construction on what has been given in the opinion already referred to. I have it not by me, but I recollect substantial ly what it was. ' The convention called, to form a new Constitution for the State was called under the authority ot an act of the Legislature of Maryland, and under that alone. By that Legislature, their proceedings were to be sub mitted to the then legal voters of the State. The con vention thought that they were authorized themselves to impose/not only as an authority to vote what was not imposed by the existing Constitution and laws, but that they had a right 16 admit to vote those who are prohibited from voting by said Constitution and laws; and I said, in company with the whole bar of the State.' and what thq»whole bar throughout the "Union would .have said, that to that extent they had usurped the' authority under which aione they were authorized to meet, and that, so far. the proceeding was a nullity. , They had prescribed this oath, and all the opinion said, or was intended to say, was that to take this oath voluntarily was not a craven submission to usurped authority, but was necessary in order to en able the citizen to protect his rights under the then 'Constitution, and that there was no moral harm in taking an path which the Convention had no autho rity to impose. Intake it no reflection onanymem- 'ber of this Court when I say that, upon a question of that description, I am at least able to form as cor- ' rect- an opinion as any of the gentlemen around this table. I am here at the instance of that lady (pointing to -Mrs. Surratt), whom I never saw or heard of till yes- ¦ terday, she being a Maryland lady, protesting*ner In nocence to me; because I deem it a right, due to the , character of the profession to which I belong, arid ot , which you are members, that she should not gounde- 'fended. I was todo involuntarily, without compensa tion. The law prohibits me from receiving compen sation; but if it had not, understanding her condition, I should never have dreamed of refusing upon the ground of her inability to make compensation. I am ,now volunteering to do what evidence will justify me in doing for this lady, who is now being tried for her life. My detestation of every one concerned in this nefarious plot, carried out with such fiendish malice, is , as great as that of any member of this Court. lam ' not here to protect any one who, when the evidence is heard, T shall deem to have been guilty— not even her. Will the honorable member of the Court who has thought it proper or believed it his duty to make thiB objection, or the President, who said that if the honor- »ble.memberhacbiot made it he should have done so, will they understand that I am not pleading here for "anytning personal to myself? I stand too firmly set tled in my own convictions of honor and in my sense of duty ..public and private, to be alarmed"at all at any individual opinion that may be expressed, I ask the Court toidecide, and I have no doubt they shall decide as seem.Tbest to them, and ifit shall be siich a decision as the President of the Court feeta Inclined to make, I can lake care of myself in the future. Remarks of Brigadier-General Harris. I trust it is not necessary I should assure you nor the gentleman to whom I feel it my duty to object ¦as counsel before this Court, that Iishould say that I desire, above all things, not to do injustice to any man , and I can assure you that, in doing what I feel it ,my duty to do, I have not been Influenced by any per sonal considerations. Though I never had the plea sure of acquaintance of the gentleman to whom I ob ject, 1 have known him long as an eminent public man of'ourcountry^ofwhom I mustsay,that my Impres sion.* have been of a v ory favombJ c character. But in regard to the matter of the objection, if myrecollec- tion'serves me right, 1 must contend that it is wen founded.' **_„*' r- It is due to the gentleman that I should say that I have mad*? this objection simply from the recollection of this letter, which I read, perhaps, nearly a year ago, and of tbe effects of thatletter upon the vote of that State. Now, if I understand the remarks of that gen tleman in explanation of this1 "thing," I cannot say that it removes the difficulty, from my mind, at least I understand him to say that the doctrine he taught the peopfeiof his State was that because the Conven tion had framed and 'required the taking ot an.oatb as a qualification toth'e right of suffrage, which was un constitutional and illegalvin his opinion, and, there fore, it had ho moral binding' force, and that people might take it and then go and vote without regard, to the subject matter of 'that oath. If that doesnot justify my conclusion, X confess I am unable to understand the English language. M ^ ,,, .. . '. Now I wish the gentleman to understand me, that in regard to his ability to decide a legal question I do ndt intend to enter into any controversy. He remarked to the .Court rather boastinely that he js as well ableas any member of this Court to judge m regard to any legal point, but this is not a point of law, it is a question of ethics and of the morality of the thing; of the sanctity of an oath voluntarily taken, which I un derstand he taught his people might be set aside as having no force, because the convealion bad trans cended its authority, and done something it had no right to do, and that consequently they might volun tarily take this oath to entitle them to go andvota .without considering it to have any binding force; and I am much mistaken in the history of those days, anu in the effect of that opinion upon the vote of that State if it was not so considered, A large number cast their suffrages %under that ethi cal doctrine taught by the gentleman against whom! have objected; but as J was about to remark, I would be sorry to do injustice to the gentleman, or any other man. and having made my objection simply from my recollection of this letter, it is. perhaps, due to the gen tleman and the members of this Court, that thpjetrer itseif should be submitted to the scrutiny of this Court. I maybe wrong; if so, none can be more ready than myself to- acknowledge that fact. Rejoinder of Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson said:— I do not intend to make an ex tended reply to the gentleman's remarks. AsT^o my boasting about my competency to decide any legal question, the gentleman is mistaken. I said as com- Eetentas any of the members of this court, they not eing lawyers. Now the honorable member seems to suppose that because I said there was no harm in tak ing an oath, that I meant there would be no harm in breaking it, if it was taken. If that is tbe meaning of tne terms, I am better informed in regard to it now than I ever was before. I have already ..said to th* court that I had no idea of using them for any such purpose; that according to my interpretation of them they admitted of no such construction. When a gen tleman is^dealing with gentlemen, even If the words he used were liable to misrepresentation,' his explana tion of the intended meaning of them is held to he sufficient. I submit that amongst gentlemen, and I hope I am n,ot boasting that in that capacity I may consider myself equal to any member of this Court, I repeat, when, as a gentleman, I say they were notuBedfor any such design as imputed to them, the gentleman to whom the explanation is given will not be disposed to repeat that they were In point of fact used with that design. Now as to the effect upon thepeople of Maryland, I don't know where the honorable mem ber is from, but he is not a citizen of our State, I sup pose. General Harris— I am a citizen of "Western "Virginia. Mr. Johnson— I supposed you were not a citizen of Maryland. I was about £b say,whoeversupposed,and I hope he will send for the letter, that the people of Maryland can be induced by individual opinion to take an Oath in order toviolate it is under a very great misapprehension. We nave had, what I regret, iiun- dreds and hundreds of our citizens who have left our borders and participated in the Rebellion; but hun dreds and hundreds also of those who remained hiuve proved true to their flag, and have evinced their lov- alty upon the battle-field with their blood, and with their Uvea; and in therelation in which I stand to tha people of Mary land, I may be permitted to say, they are the equals, morally And patriotically, of the people of Western Virginia. Theretjrere other topiqs involved In the Constitution which influenced the votes of those who voted against It, to which it is unnecessary and useless here to refer. But I deny, and deny implicitly, that there was a single man who voted because of that opinion, or who took the oath with a view to vote, thereby to violate the obligation. But as a legal question it Is something new to me. The objection made, if well founded in fact, is well founded in law. Are the members o f this Conrt to measure the moral character of every counsel who mav appear before them? Is that their function? What influence has that upon theCourt by which their Judgment could be led astray. His client may suflfer TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT' WASHINGTON. 23 from the possible prejudice it may create in the minds or the'Court. But how can the Court suffer? -Who gives to the Court the jurisdiction to decide upon the moral char acter of the counsel who may appear before them? Who-makes tuem the arbiters of publicmorality, or of my professional morality? What authority have they under their commission to rule me out, or any other ceuusel out, upon the ground that he does not recog nize the validity of an oath, Q»en if they believed it? But I put myself on no such grounds. I deem myseli, in all moral respects, to be the equal of any member of this tribunal. They may dispose of the question as they please, it will not touch me. Response of Mr. Harris. The Court will understand ' me as not intending to cast any reflection upon the people of Maryland in re gard to loyalty and morality, or in regard to patriot ism. I am proud to.Say tfiat they have a good record in this great contest through which our country has just passed. While it is true of Maryland, I am sorry to say it is equally true of my State, that many joined the Rebellion, and havemade for themselves a terrible record. But the circumstances ofthis casewere rather peculiar. The people of Maryland were about to vote upon an alteration in the fundamental law of the State, upon the adoption of a new constitution— a con stitution which made some radical changes in regard to the social status of the people of Maryland. Slavery was about to be blotted out, that was the purpose, and it is an unfortunate fact that that portion of the people interested in the proposed change were. as a general thing, the disloyal portion, and it was in reference to the elFect which this opinion expressed by the honorable gentleman in the letter referred to had upon that vote, and upon the action of this portion of the people, that my objection was in part founded, for it did seem as though tney understood it as I did. In regard to the right of the court to inquire into the moral standing of counsel we have no such right, but theorderconstitutingthis Court makes provision for the prisoners or the accused having the aid of counsel. The provisions in reference to that matter is that gentlemen shall exhibit a certificate oF having taken the oath, or shall take it in presence of the Court, and thus the obligation of an oath is here aspeciai question. If it does not appear that he ignores the moral obli gation, and we admit him, it defeats the very provi sions of the order, hence I think that it improper in me, ai a member of theCourt, to found an objection of that character upon such grqunds. whether the objection is sustained or not. The gentleman disclaims any sucn intention, but that is a tacit admissidhthatthc language of that letter may have been unguarded, that it may have had the effect supposed, though it was not in ac cordance wLih the intention of his mind in writing it. It is an unfortunate thing if he wrote a letter so mis construed, but if it was not the intention of the writer, that of course mustexonerate him. He disavows hav ing any such intention, and claims for himself a moral character, which he is not 'ashamed to put in compari son with that of any member of the Court. Now it is not my purpose to measure characters at all. but simply to bring forward an objection; I felt it my duty to bring, and nothing else, an objection founded on the understanding I had of the letter re ferred to. I was sorry to have to doit, hut I did.it in no spirit of personal ill will or bad feeling. I was ".* sorry that it was my dutyto do'such a thing, butl could not do anything else with the im iression I had on my mind, and he, as an honorable gentleman, will understand what I mean by this.- He understands, too. what the force of conscientious convictions must be, and that if a man acts from principle, this thing will occasionally impose upon him some unpleasant duties. His disavowal of auy such intention as I de rived from memory of his letter I am bound to take; but this I must insist upon, thatthere was some ground for the objection. Reply of Mr. Johnson. Mr. President, one word more. All I propose to say is that the order confers no authority to reiuse me ad mission, on the grounds claimed by the honorable member, because you have no authority to adminis ter ttae oath tome. I have taken it in the Senate of the United States, in the Circuit Court of my State, in the Supreme Court of the United States, and I am a practitioner in all the courts in nearly all the States; and it would be a little singular if one who has a right to appear before the Supreme Court of the land, ' and who belongs to the body that creates courts-mar tial, shall not (have the right to appear before counts-martial. Major-General Hunter.— Mr. Johnson has made an intimation as to holding members of the court person ally responsible. Mr. Johnson— I made no such intimation, nor in tended it. Major-general Hunter—I shall say no more than I was going to say. The day had passed when freemen from the North were to be bullied and insulted by the humbug chivalry of the South. The Court here took a recess for half an hour, and when it returned, went ipto secret session, in order to deliberate upon the objection so lengthily discussed. The Court being reopened, General Harris stated ¦ that he desired to* withdraw his objection, as he con sidered Mr. Johnson's explanation a satisfactory re moval of the grounds .-on which the objection was founded. Mr.Mohnson expressed his desire and willingness to take the oath, but the Court deemed It unnecessary, and the oath was not taken. The Testimony. A, W. Lee, being sworn, testified as follows: Q. Do you belong to the police force? A. Yes sir, to the military police. ' Q> State whether atany time you examined the room of Atzeroth, at the Kirkwood House. A. Yes sir. I was ordered by Major O'Beirne to go into the principal part of the building and see how the house was situated. 1 made the examination, and told him one could get Irom the roof to a stairway in the back of the building which would admit him into any part of the building. I told the Major the circumstances. Q. When was that? A. (Here the witness looked aft a paper.) It was the night of the 15th of April. I then Went, and while there a friend came to me and said there was a rather suspicious looking man who had taken a room there the day previous, and I had befctei goandlook. I went, and found in the register, badly written, the name of Atzeroth— E. A. Atzerott— J made it out; but in fact nobody could mako it out until I asked the proprietor, and he mane it out on the register. Q. Where did you go after that? A. I went up stairs to the room, and saw one ofthe clerks, andl asked him to go up to the room with me; found the door locked, and he said the party had taken the key with him; I wen* to one ofthe proprietors and asked if he had any ob jections to my goingintotheroom.ifwecouldfind akey to fit it; he said no; but though he tried his keys, we could not get in. I asked him it we might burst In the door; he said he had no objection, and we burstthe door open; when We went in I saw a coat hanging on the wall. Colonel Burnett here ordered a bundle to be passed to the witness. This bundle, on being opened by the Colonel, was found to be a coat, rolled in which were sundry small articles. Witness— That coat was hanging upon the wall. Just In that way as you go in, on the left-band side. That's the coat, sir. Q. State what examination you made ofthe room?. A. Well. I saw that coat right opposite; the bea" stood on the right; J. went towards the oed* and underneath the pillow or bolster found a revolver bound with brass. Here a pistol was shown to witness, passing through the hands of Mr. Johnson, who re marked, "It is loaded." Witness— I then went down stairs to find Major O'Beirne, andwewvent up»tairs to the room again; I took the coat down andfound this book and that also. Q. In the pockets? A. Yes sir. Q; Look inside that book and see what was written in it? A. Yes sir; Jhere was an account, too, ori the Ontario Bank of four'hundred and fifty-five dollars; I then put my hand in the pocket again and found this handkerchief with the name ot Mary R. Booth on it; I then pulled out this other.handkerchief. and had some- difficulty in making out the mark, but I think itistf E. Nelson or P. A. Nelson upon it; I found this hand kerchief with M. H. on the corner; Igotthisnewpalr of gauntlets; I labeled all these things myself, and I got these three boxes of Colt's cartridges. Q. Do they fit- the pistol? A. 1 never loaded the pistol, sir; I don't know; I foffnd this piece of licorice and this brush. Q. This writing was in the back of that book, Mr X Wilkes Booth, in account with the Bank of Ontario, four hundred andfifty dollars? A. Yes, sir; I then got that spur.and pair of socks; that is all I got out of tha pockets. Q. Do you remember the number of the rbom? A. It was room 120, sir. Q. Was it over where Vice-President Johnson was at that time? TJrfe witness here entered into an explanation of the locality totally unintelligible, but upon being shown a plan or sketch by Mr. Ben. Pitt- man, seemed to recognize the situation of the room. This plan, however, was not admitted in evidence. A. I went around the room, took up the carpets, took out the washstand, moved the stove and made a thorough, search, and then went to the bed again; took Ofi'the clothes piece by piece, and after I came down underneath the sheets and mattrasses I got those bowie knives. Here a knife was shown the witness, and handed to the various members of the Court. It was long and stylus-shaped, like that used by Booth, horn handled and sheathed in red leather. Q. You did not see him In the room yourself? A. No shr: he had left the day before: theclerkwhowas there said he would recognize the man. ,1 24 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. &. Go and get him after you have, been examined,. withor without a subpoena; bring him as soon as you can. . , * Here the examination in chief, which .had been conductedby Judge Holt, Advocate -Gene ral ofthe United States, was closed. Cross-examination— Q. What is your business? A. Detective officer of the Board of Enrollment of the District of Columbia, of which Major 'O'Beirne is Pro vost Marshal. Q. How long have you followed the business ? A, I have been in service ever since I left New York on the commencement ot the war; I was in the Ninety-fifth Mew York Volunteers. . Q. How lopg have you been a detective*In Washing ton ? A. Ever since the burning of Aquia Creek; I had been discharged as a volunteer from the Ninety-filth New York. (J. You mentioned a conversation with some one In reference to a suspicious character at the Kirkwood House. Where did you first see the man who told you his name ? A. I first saw him in the house. Q. Was he aclerk ? A. A night watchman, I think. Q. What was his precise language to you? - j^ He said to me there was a suspicious, bad, villainous Took- ingfellow came into the place and took a room, and lie didn'tlike the appearance of him. Q. When was it that person had come and taken a room ? A. I think it was the day before. Q. Can you say for certain ? A. No sir ; I would not beposiiive about it ; I think to the best of my know ledge it was the day beiore. Q. Did he describe his appearance to you ? A. Yes sir; he did. Q. Repeat his description. A. I don't think I could, as he described it to me ; I don't recollect; I think he said he had a grey coaton. T). Rave you ever seen, to your knowledge, Mr. At zeroth? A. I don't know that I have ever seen him; I have seen most everybody knocking around about Washington; i don't know as I ever saw him to know him by name; can't say that I have or have not. Q. What f|rst. brought you to the Kirkwood House? A. I wasat home eating my supper ; Mr. Cunningham came after me, one of our force; no, I had gone out alter supper and I think I met him a square irom the house; says he, you are wanted immediately at the girkwood House; I went, and there was Major O'Beirne; I found men all about there, detailed for duty to protect the President, or at that time the Vice Pre sident. d. Describe the appearance ofthe man who gave gou the information. A, The man was about your uild, He may be' a Tittle heavier, but about your height. 0> How old does he look to be ? A. Somewhere about your age. Q. What is my age ? A. I take you to be about thirty. Q. Don't you know his name? A. No sir. I don't. Q. Now will you describe the relative position of Johnson's room and the room in which you found this coat? • The witness here entered into a series of gesti culations and explanations, from which neither court, counaels or reporters could derive any understanding of his meaning or the locality he sought to describe. Q,. Did you find any signature of Atzeroth in the room? A. I did not. Q. What made you think it was his room? A. Be cause it said so on the register. It was No. 126. Q. You have no other evidence except the register? A. No sir. I don't know as I have any other eoidence. Q. That is all. Testimony of Lewis J. Weichman. Q. State to the Court if you know James II. Surratt.- A. Ido.jl first made his acquaintance in the fall ot 1862, in St. Charles county. Maryland, or in the fall of 1859, 1 should say. 1 Q. How long were you together then? A. Until 1862; Ijenewed my acquaintance with him in January, 1863. Q. In this city? A. Yes sir. Q. When did you begin to board af the house of his mother, the prisoner here? A. On the 1st of Novem ber, 1864, Q. Where is her house? A. On H street, No. 541. Q. See if that is Mrs. Surratt sitting by you there? A. yes sir, that is Mrs. Surratt. .. Q,. Will you state when you first made youracquaint- ®nce with Dr. Mudd. A. It was on or about the 15th of January, 1805. Q. State under what circumstances. A. I was pass ing down Seventh street, with Surratt, and when yearly opposite Odd. Fellows'. Hall, someone called out, "Surratt,, Surratt." On looking, around Surratt recognized an old acquaintance of his, of Charles dbunty, Maryland; he introduced Dr. Mudd to me, and Dr. Mudd- introduced Mr. Booth, who was incompahy with him, to both of us; they were coming up Seventh street and we were coming down. Ci. By the Court. Do you mean J. Wilkes Booth ? A. Yes sir, J. Wilkes Booth, Q. Where did you goto then? A. He invited us to his room at the National Hotel. Q,. Who? A. Booth; he told us to be seated, and ordered segars and wine to the room for four, and Dr. Mudd then went out to the passage and called Booth out and had a Bf iVate couversation with him. Booth arid the Doctdrjhen came in and called Surratt out, leaving me alone. . / Q. How long?' A. Fifteen or twenty minutes. Q. Doyou know the 'nature of their conversation? A. NojIwassittltrgOn a lounge, near the window; they came m at last, and Mudd came near me on the settee, and apologized lor their private conversation, stating he had private business with Booth, who wished opurchase his farm. Q. Did you see any manuscript of any sort on the table? A. No. Booth at one time cut the back of an envelope and made marks on it with a pencil. Q. Was he" writing on it? A. I should not consider it writing, but marks alone ; they were seated at the If table in the centre of the room. Q, Did you see the marks? A. No sir; just saw motion of the pencil; Booth also Came tome and apolo gized, andsaid he wished to purchase Mudd'sfarm; Mudd had previously stated to me that he did not care to sell his farm to Booth, as he was not willing to .give him enough for it. Q. You didn't hear a word spoken between them in regard to the farm? A, Nosir; I did not know the nature of their conversation attall. Q,. Did rrinderstandtyou to say that you did not hear any of their conversation at the table, but oniv saw the motion of the pencil? A. Yes sir, — Q. You continued to board at Mrs. Surratt's? A. I boarded there up to the time of the assassination. Q. After thisinterview at the National, state wlietheir Booth calledfrequentlyatMrs. Surratt's? A. Yes Si*. Q. Whom did he call to see? A. He generally called for John H. Surratt, and, in his absence, called ioi Mrs., Surratt Q. Were those interviews held apart, or in presence of other persons? A. 'Always apart: I have been in company with Booth in the parlor with Surratt, but Booth has taken Surratt to a room up stairs, and eo gage in private conversation up there; he would say' nJohn, can you spare me a word? come"up stairs;" they would go and engage in private conversation, which would last two or three hours. Q. Did the same thing occur with Mrs. Surratt? A. Yes. Q. Have you eVer seen the prisoner Atzeroth? A. I have. sir. Q. Do you recognize him here? A. Yes sir; that Is he. Q. Have you ever seen him at Mrs. Surratt's? A. He camethere abqut three weeks after I formed the ac quaintance of Bobth. Q. Who did he inquire for? A. For Mr. Surratt, John H. Q. Did you ever see him with Booth there, or only withSurrati? A. I have never seen him in the house with Booth. Q. How often did he call? A. Some ten or fifteen times. Q. What was the name by which he was known by the young ladies of the house? A. They understood that he came from Port Tobacco, and instead of calung him by his own name, they gave him the nickname of Port Tobacco. Q. Did you ever see him on the street ? A. Yes sir.*1 I have me t him on the eorner of Seventh and Penn sylvania avenue; it was about the time Booth played Pescara, in the Apostate; Booth had given Surratt two complimentary tickets, on that occasion, and we wens down and met Atzeroth; we told him where we were going, and he said he wis going too, and at the theatre we met David C. Harold. Q. Do you know Harold ? Do you see him here ? A. Yes sir. Here Harold bent forward, and laughingly inclined toward the witness". Witness— We also met another gentleman there, named Hollahan, who stopped in the house- we met him in thetheatre, and we remained until the play was over, and the five of us lea together and went Wether aslar as the corner of Tenth and E streets, but on turning around Surratt noticed that Atzeroth' and Harold were not following, and I went and found them in the restaurant adjoining the theatre, talking ' confidentially with Booth; on my approaching tbev separated, and then we took a drink, and there was a gentleman there whose face I remember; we left and joined the other two gentlemen, and went to another restaurant to have some oysters. ¦ *" «"u«ue* Q- Do you know where Surratt left his horses in thi> city? A. He stated to me that he had^wo horses « nd that he kept them at Howard's stable/ on ^sS3t be tween Sixth and Seventh. »•*<»«• on ^ street, d©- Q-/>id£°«ever Bee Atzeroth there? A. Yes, sir, on the day of the assassi nation. 7 8* Sjmttimewasjt?' a, About half-past two o'clock, a ^25*$ Y". hKe d01DS? A. He seemed to be hiring a horsed I had b&en sent by Mrs. Surratt to hire a buggy: when I got there I saw Atzeroth, aud asked What he wanted; lie said he wanted to hire a horse- ho asked Brookdir hecould have a horse, and he told him he could not; then we left, and both of us went as far as TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHLNGTOA. 25 the Post Office: I had a letter to draw out, and after that he went off cowards Tenth street. Q. Was this horse that was kept there Surratt's or Booth's? A. I will state that on toe Tuesday previous •to the assassination I was also sent to the National Hotel to sea Booth, and' get his buggy for Mrs. fciur- ratt. She wished me to drive her into the country. Booth said he had sold his buggy, but he would give me ten aolltirs. and I should hire a buggy for Mrs. Sur- tatt, and spoke of the horses he kept at Brooks' stables. I then said they were Surratt's; he said they " were mine." Q. Did Booth give you ten dollars? A, Yes, sir. Q. Hid you drive her out? A. Yes, sir. Q. To what joint? A. To Surrattsville; we left at ten and, reached there at twelve; that was on Tuesday, the 11th. Q. Did you return that day? A. Yes sir; we only remained half an hour; Mrs. Surratt said she went for the purpose of seeing Mrs. Nothy, who owed her money. Q. You continued to board at Mrs. Surratt's? A. I boarded there up to the time of the assassination. Q. After the interview at the National, statewhether Booth Qftlled frequently at Mrs. Surratt's. A. Yes sir. Q. Whom did he call to see? A. He generally called for John H. iSurratt, and in his absence Galled for Mrs. Surratt. Q. Were these interviews held apart or in presence? A. Always apart; I have been in company with Booth in the parlor, with Surratt, but Booth has taken Sur ratt to a room up stairs and engaged in private conver sation up there; he would say, "John, can you spare a word?— come up stairs." They would go and engage in private conversation, which, would last two or three hours. ; Q. Did the same thing ever occur with Mrs. Surratt?, A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you everseen the prisoner Atzeroth? A. I have, sir. Q, Do you recognize him here? Yes.sir, that is he. Q. State whether on the following Friday, that is the day of the assassination, you drove Mrs. Surratt into the country? A. Yes sir. Q. Where did you drive to? A. To Surrattsville; we arrived there about half-past four. • Q. Did she stop at the house ot Mr. Lloyds? A. Yes sir; she went into the parlor. Q,. What time did you have to return? A. About half-past six. Q™ Can you go down there iri"two hours? A. When the roads are good you couljl easily get down there in two hours. Q. State whether you remember, some time in the month of Mar^h, a man calling at Mrs. Surratt's, and fiving himself the name of Wood, and inquiring for ohn H. Surratt? A. Yes, I opened the door for him. He asked it Mr. Surratt was in; I told him no, but I introduced him to the family; he had then expressed a wish to see Mrs. iSurratt, Q. Do y6u recognize him. here? A. Yes, sir; that's he; that's the man Payne; he called himself Wood then. Q. How long did he remain with Mrs. Surratt. A. He stopped in the house all night, and had supper served up to him in my room; they brought him sup- per from the kitchen. .. . Q. When was that? A. As nearly as I can recolleet, it was about eight weeks previous to the assassination. I have no exact knowledge of the date. Q. Did he bring apackage? A. No, sir. CJ. How was he dressed? A. He had a black over coat on and a black frock coat with grey pants at the time. Q. Did he remain till the next morning? A. Yes; he left in the earliest train for Baltimore. _ Q. Do you remember whether, some weeks after, the same' man called again? A. Yes. I should think it was about three- weeks, and I again went to the door. I then showed hrm into the parlor, and again asked his name. That time he gave the name of Payne. Q. Did he then have an interview with Mrs. Surratt? A. Miss Fitzpatriek, myself and Mrs. Surratt were pre sent; he remained about three days, and represented himself to be a Baptist preacher; he said he had been in Baltimore about a week, had taken the oath of alle giance, and was going to become a good loyal citizen. the 27th of March. [ Q. The name of the person was not given? A. No, sir, no name w? s mentioned at all. Q. Did you afterwards learn that Payne was at that house?- A. Yes, sir. I met Atzeroth on the street. - andasked him where he was going? He stated that he was going to see Payne. I asked him, is it Payne that is at the:Herndon House, and he said yes. ft, DidybuevermeetHaroldatSurratt's? A. Once. ¦ Q. Where else did you see him? A. I met him on the occasion of the visit to the theatre, when Booth played "Piscara;" also, at Mrs. Surratt's, In the Spring of 1863, when I firstTnade her acquaintance; 'he was there with some musicians who were serenading somfr county officers after an election; 1 next met him in 1864, at church ; these are the only times I recollect. Q. Do you know either of the prisoners, Arnold or Laughlin? A. No, sir. 1 Q. What knowledge, if any, have you of Surratt's having gone to Richmond. A. About the 23d of March —no, it wag the 17th. There was a woman named SlaP der came to the house: she went to Canada and re-. turned on Saturday, the 23d of March. Mr. Surratff drove her into tire country, about eight o'clock in the morning, and I understood that he had gone to Bich"1 mond with Mrs. Slader. This Mrs. Slader was to meet a man named Ho we, but this man was captured and could not takeher. Q. She was a blockade runner ? A. Yes, sir, or the bearer of despatches. Q. Did Mrs. Surratt tell you so ? A. Yes , sir. Q. When did he return ? A. He returned on the third of April. Q. Do you know of his having brought any gold with him ? A. Yes, he had some nine or eleven twenty dollar gold pieces, and he had some greenbacks, about fifty dollars; he gave forty dollars in gold to Mr,: Hollihan, and Mr. Hollihan gave him sixty dollars In greenbacks; he remained in the house about an hour, and told me he was going to Montreal; he asked me, however, to go and take some oysters with him, and we went clown to the corner of Seventh street and Pennsylvania avenue, and took some oysters. Q, And he left? A. Yes, he left that evening, and since that time I have not seen him. Q. Haveyouseenanyletterfromhim? A. Yes.Is^w a letter to his mother, dated April 12th: it was received hereon the 14th, I also saw another written to Miss Ward, Idid not see the date, but the receipt of the letter was prior to the one ot'his mother, , Q. Did he have any conversation \with you, as he * passed through, about the foil of Richmond? A. Yes, be told me he did not believe it; he said he had seen .Benjamin and Davis, and they had told him that it would not be evacuated, and he seemed to be incredu lous. Q. Have you been to Canada since? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you there loam of Surratt ? A. That he had arrived at Montreal qn^he 6th, and returned for the States on the 12th, returning again on the 18th, and engaging rooms at the St. Lawrence Hotel. He lett the St. Lawrence that night at half-past ten. He was seen to leave the house of a Mr. Butterfield, in company with three others, in a wagon. Objected to, and the statement not insisted on as a part of the record. Q. Doyou remember earlier In April that Mrs. Sur ratt sent for you, and asked you to give Mr. Booth no tice that she wished to see him ? A. Yes, sir. 26 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Q. What was the message? A. Merely that she wished to see him. Q. Did she say on private business.oruse any expres sion of that kind? A. Yessir. Q. Did you deliver the message? A. I did. * Q. What did Booth say? A. He said he would come to the house immediately, or as soon as he could. Q. What time was this? A» Some time in April; it was the second; when she sent me I found fn Booth's s room Mr. McCollom.the actor; I communicated to Booth her desire, ana he did come in the evening of the 2d. Q> State whether he called on the evening ofthe 1-lth of April, the day of the assassination? A. Yes, sir; about half-past two, o'clock, when I was going out at the door I met Mrs. Surratt, speaking to Booth. Q. Were they alone? a. Yes, sir; they werealona in the parlor. Q. How long was it after that when you started for the country?" A. He didn't, remain more than three ¦or four minutes., •* i Q. And immediately after that you set out for the country? A, Yesj-sir. This examination in chief, like the preceding one, was conducted by General Holt, Judge Advocate of the United States. j Cross examination by Reverdy Johnson: — Q. How long have you been at Mrs. Surratt's? A. Since December, 1864 ; Mrs. Surratt at that-time had moved to the city from, the country; she had rented her farm. * ' Q,. Did you ever live with her in the country ? A. No, sir; but x had visited her. Q. You knew her very well at that time? A. Npt very well; I made her acquaintance through her son, who was a school-mate of mine: I sometimes went there, and always experienced kindness and courtesy. Q; What sort of a. house had she in the city here? A. It "contained eight rooms— six farge and two,sm&Il. Q. Was she in the habit of renting her rooms out? A. Yessir. , Q. Did she furnish board, as well as rooms? A. Yes sir. Q. Did you say that young Surratt told you in April. . -he was going to Montreal; did y^u ever know him to go there before? A. NoBir; he was there in the win ter of 1864 and 1865; sometimes at home and sometimes n©t; during the winter of 1864, especially during No vember, he was in the country most of the time; his stay at home was not permanent; he was sometimes away for three or four weeks. , Q. During the winter, was he long enough away to, have been In Canada without your knowing it? A. Yes, Sir. He could have gone but not returned to the house Without my knowledge. . Q. Have you any knowledge that he was then in Canada? A. No sir. . 0> Were you on intimate terms with him? A. Very intimate, indeed. . Q. .Did he evftr acknowledge to you any purpose to assassinate the President?. A. No sir, he stated to me and to his sister, that he was going to Kurope*on a cot ton speculation; he said he had had three thousand dollars advanced to him by a gentleman; that he would So to, Liverpool, thence to Nassau, and from there to f atamoros, to find his brother, who was in the Bebel army— in Magruder's army. , \C&. Did he go to Texaj before the Rebellion— the bro- her I mean. A. I don't know; never saw the bro ther. Q. Were you in the habit of seeing young Surratt al most every day. A. Yes sir. He would be seated 'at the same table, We occupied the same room. He slept with me. Q. During the whole of that period you never heard A him intimate it was his intention to assassinate the President? A. No sir. Q. Did you see anything that led_you to believe? Question was objected to by Colonel Burnett, Assistant Judge Advocate, and was. waived by Mr. Johnson. / Q. You never heard him or anybody else say any thing about it from the month of November to the time ofthe assassination? A. No sir; he said once he was going with Booth to be abactor, and he'said he was going to Richmond; he was well educated, and Was a student of divinity. Q. Were you a student with him? A. Yes sir; I was in the College one year longer than he. • Q,. During that period what was his character? A. It was excellent; when he left he shed tears, and the Superoir told him he would always be remembered by those who had charge of the Institution. Q. When did you first drive into the country with Mrs. Surratt? A. The first. occasion -was on the nth Of April. Q. Didshetell you what herobjectwas in going? A. She said to see Nothy, who owed her some money and the Interest on it for thirteen years. Q. Is there such a man? A. Yesisir. there is. U. Do you know whether she then saw him? A When we arrived at the village Mr. Nothy was not there and she told the bar-keeper to send a messenger for him, and he sent one; In the meantime we went to Captain G Wynne's house; remained there two hours and took dinner; he said he would like to return with us, and he did, to Surrattsville; on returning we found Nothy and she transacted her business with him. 0>. Did you know^he man? A. No; Mr. Nott, the barkeeper, said he was in the parlor ; I didn'b«go in. Q. State what her purpose was in the second visit. A. She said she had received a letter in regard to this money due her by Mr. Nothy. Q. Was the letter of thesame date? A. Yes. and she stated she was compelled again to go to the country, and asked me to drive her down, and I consented. Q. Did you see the letter? A. No— no, sir; she said that she had received it, and that it required her to go to Surrattsville-; that's all I know. Q. Did. you go in a buggy? A. Yessir. Q. Any one else go with you v A. No one but I and her went. _ , Q, .Did she take anything with her? A. Only two packages, one with letters concerning her estate,- and a femaller package, about six inches in diameter; it looked like two or three saucers wrapped in .brown paper; this was put in the bottom of the buggy, and taken out when, we got to Surrattsville. Q. How long did you remain ? A. Till half-past six. Q. What'time did you reach home? A. Abont hall- past nine or ten. Q. .When did you hear, or did you hear ofthe ssassi- nation of thePresident or the attack on Secretary jriew*- ard? I.A. I heard it at three o'clock on'Saturday morn ing. Q. Who came to the house within the period from your return to the time you heard ofthe assassination ofthe President? A. There was some one rang the bell, but who it was I don't know. Q. Was the bell answered? A. Yes sir. s Q. By whom? A. By Mrs. Surratt. CJ. Was there any one at the door? A. Yes sir; 1 heard footsteps going into the parlor, and immediately- going out. Q. How long was that after you got back? A. About ten minutes; I was taking supper. Q,. That was before ten o'clock? A. Yessir. Q. Then it was before the time of the assassination, which is-said to have been about ten o'clock? A. Yes, sir. ¦ Q. Had persons been in the habit of coming for rooms to the house? A. -Yes; coming from the country they1 would stop at the house; she had many acquaintances and was always very hospitable, and they could get rooms as long as they chose. Q,. Did Atzeroth take a, room? A. Atzeroth, to my knowledge, Btopped in the house butone night. Q. Did he take a room? A. Not that I know of. Q. What room did he sleep in? A. On the third story. Q. Then he hada, room there that night? A. Yes. Q. Did he leave next day? A. Yes. Q. You saw Paine',ty£urself when he came to the house? Yes sir; the first time he gave the name of Wood; I went to the door^nd ^opened it, and he said he would like to see Mrs. Surratt. Q. What was his appearance, genteel? A. Yes. he had on along black coat, and vwnj&K into the parlor: he acted very politely; asked Mrs. Surraatt. to play on the piano for him. Q. Do you know why Atzeroth left the house? A. No sir. \ Q. Was there any drinking in the ha^se at the time that Atzeroth was there? A. Yes-sir; -in February there was a man there uamed^Hariana; John burratt had beerfin thecountryvand had remrned that even ing; he slept that n jght with Howe. d. Was there any drinking in the room occupied by Atzeroth? A. fVes. Q,. Washeudisy? A. No sir. Q. H.3veyou«'any knowledge that hewas told that he could atop there no longer? A. No. Q, Oid he leave there next day? A. Yes sir; his leaving was owing to the arrival or Surratt; he said he wanted to see John, and having seen him, he left; I heard them allerwards-say they did not care to have him brought to the house. Q. What reason did they give for that? A. Mrs Surratt said sue did not care to have such sticks brought to the house; they were no company for her. Q. He did not come any more? A. Not since the2d of April. Q. Vou say you found upon your own table a false moustache; what was the color of the hair? A Black. ' Q. Was it large? A. About medium sized. Q. This you put into your own box? A. Yes in a toilet box and afterwards in a box of paints; it was found in my baggage. Q. When he came home he seemed to be looking for it? A. Yes( hesaid *' Where is my moustache?" Q. Why did you not give it to him? A. I suspected I thought it queer. ' Q. But you locked it up? A. Yes, I didn't like to have it seen in my room. Q. But you could have got it out of your room bv gmngitto him when he asked iorit? A. Ithoueht no honest person had a reason «to wear a false mous tache. I took it and exhibited it to some of the clerks in the office. I put it on with specs, and was making fun with it. «*~wmg TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 2T Q. Can you describe to the court young Surratt's height and general appearance? A. He Is about six feet; prominent forehead and very large nose; his eyes are sunk; he has a goatee and very long hair, black. Q. Do you recollect how be was dressed when he said he was going away ? A. He had cream colored pants, grey frock coat and grey- vest, and had a shawl thrown over him. Q. One of those scotch shawls ? One of those plaid shawls. ,Q. When he returned from Richmond you say he had in his possession twenly gold pieces? A. No, sir; I say nine or eleven twenty-dollar gold pieces. Q. Did he tell yon where he got them? A. No. Q*. He said he had seen Davis and Benjamin; did you understand, by Benjamin.tbe person who acted as Secretary of State for the Rebel Confederacy? A. All I know is, he said- he saw Davis and Benjamin, and that Richmond would not be evacuated. Q. You didn't ask him, nor did he voluntarily tell you where he got that money? A. No, sir. Q. Give the date ofthe letter his mother received from him since he left. A. It was dated Montreal, April 12th, and was received here April 14th. Q. How did you become acquainted with the date of the letter; by the postmark? A. By the heading of the letter: the letter was written in general terms; it stated that he was much pleased with the Catholic Cathedral, and that he had bought a French pea- jacket and paid ten dollars for it. but that board was too high at the St. Lawrence Hotel (two dollars a day la gold), and that he would go to a private boarding house, or tq Toronto. ' Q. How was the letter signed ? A. John Harrison; his name is John Harrison Surratt. Q, Was the handwriting disguised? A. It was un usually good for him. Q. Unusually good, tart not disguised ? You knew it at once, didn't you? A. Yes, and I remarked to Mrs. Surratt, John is improving in his writing. Q. Doyou know anything about the letter that was received by Miss Ward ? A. I only know that a letter was received by her. Q. Who is Miss Ward? A. A teacher in the school on Tenth street. Q. What was the date ofthe letter? A. I did not see that letter, Sir. I was merely told that she received a letter, and came to the house. Q. Did the letter go to her directly, or through any other person? A, I understand it went directly to her, and was received in the usual course. Q. Doyou know what that letter wa$ about? A. No sir; I merely heard Mrs. Surratt say that Miss Annie Ward had received a letter from John, What it was about I don't know. Q. You have known Mrs. Surratt since November? A. I have known her since the spring of 1863. Q. And have been living there since November? A- Yes. Q. What has been her character since that time? A. Her character was exemplary and ladylike in every particular. Q. Is she a member ofthe church? A. Yes sir. Q. Is she a regular attendant? A. Yessir. Q. Ofthe Catholic Church. A. Yes sir. Q. Have yon been with her to church? A. Every Sunday, sir. * ' Q. As far as you could judge her character in a reli- fous and moral sense.lt was every way exemplary? l. Yes, sir ; she went to her duties every two weeks. ' Q. Did She go in the morning ? A. It was sometimes in themorning and sometimes in the evening. Q. Was that the case all the time you knew her ? A. Yes sir. Q. If I understand you, then, she was apparently dis charging all her duties to God and to man? a. Yes sir. Mr. Reveredy Johnson here said: — "I am done, sir!" and rising, left the court room, and, the cross-examination of the witness was con tinued by other counsel. Question. What time was it you said Dr. Mudd in troduced Booth to yourself and Surratt? Answer. On the 15th of January, I think. Question. Have you no means of fixing the exact date? Answer.1 Yes, sir, if the register at the Pennsylvania House could be had; Dr. Mudd had his rooms there at that time. Question. Are you sure it was before the 1st of Feb ruary? Answer. Yes,sir. I am sure. Question. Are you sure it was after the 1st of Ja nuary? Answer. Yes. Q. Why. A. From a letter recelvedabout that time, about tbe 6th of January, and from a visit I made there again; *lt was immediately after the recess of Congress, Snd the room of Booth had been previously occupied y a member of Congress, and Booth pulled down s,om e f Congressional documents and remarked what good rradiiig he would have when left to himself. ft. You are certain it was after the Congressional holiday, of the occasion, and have no other means of knowing, A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever have any means of knowing it was after Christmas ? A. Merely that it was alter the Congressional holidays. Q. Well, who said anything about the member not having returned ? A. Booth did. rV £° You know who the member was? A. No. Q. How did you know that pretty much all the other members had returned ? A. Because Congress was in session at the time. Q. How dp you happen to recollect Congress was in session at the time? A. Well merely by Booth's taking down the documents and- saying what good reading he would have when lett to himself Q. Was it the first day o r Booth's arrival in the city? A. It was the first day of his taking possession of that room. , Q. Do you recollect that It was after the Congres sional holiday as distinctly as any part or the conver sation that tpok place? A. I don't recollect that fact as distinctly as I do the vconversation about the pur chase of the farm. - Q. Have you any memorandum of your own that will enable you to fix the date? A. The date could probably be fixed by the register at the Pennsylvania Q. On what street was it that you met Mudd ? A. On Seventh street opposite Odd Fellows' Hall _,,Q. What did Mudd say iu explanation of the intro duction? A. Nothing that I can remember. Surratt introduced me to him, and he introduced Booth to both of us. Q. Which Introduction came first? A. That of Mudd by Surratt to me. Q. And did Booth immediately invite you all to his room? A. Yes. Q. What was said while you Were going to the room? A. Nothing that I know. -,Q- PiA be Sive any reason for wishing you to go? A* No. In going down Seventh street Surratt took Mudd's arm and I took that of Booth's. Q. And you went directly to Booth's room, and how long" in all did you stay there? A. That I can't say exactly. Q. You say Mudd wrote something on a piece of paper? A. I say Booth traced lines on the back of an en velope, and that Surratt and Mudd were looking at it, and were engaged in a deep private conversation scarcely audible. Q. Were you in the room all that time? A. Yes sir. Q. How close to them? A. About as far as thatgen- tleman is from me. Q. Was the conversation in part audible? A. It wasr an indistinct murmur. Q. You heard none, of it? A. No. Q. Who went out the door? Did Mudd go first? A. Booth went first. Q. Are you sure? A. Yes sir. Q. How long were they out together? A. As near as I canjudge. not more than five or eight minutes. Q: Where did they go? A. Into a passage that leads past the door. Q. How do you know they stopped there? A. I don't know, for the door was closed after them, but by their movements I judge they stood outside. Q. Why? A. I did not hear any retreating footsteps. Q. Surratt went out with them? A. Yes. Q. Are you sure Booth was with them when they went out the second time? A, Yes sir. Q. Did Mudd say anything as, to how he came to in troduce Booth to Surratt? A . No sir. Q. Which one of them said it was about the farm? A. Mudd apologized to me for the privacy of the con versation .Jind said that Booth wanted to purchase his, farm, but mat he would not give a sufficient* high price and he did not care about selling it. Q. You had never seen Mudd before? A. No sir. Q. Had you heard him spoken of in the house? A. I had heard the name' mentioned, but whether it'was this particular Br. Samuel Mudd . I cannot say. Q. Didyou hear it mentioned in connection with any visit to the house? A, No sir. Q. Do you know whether he did visit the house during the time you were there? A. No sir. Q. Where did Mrs. Surratt formerly live? A. At Surrattsville. Q. On the road to Bryanstown? A. I can't say ex actly. I am not sufficiently acquainted with the coun try. Q. Doyou know whether it is on the road leading to Mudd's house? A. There were several ways of arriving at Mudd's house. One road, called the Port Tobacco road, out by Fiscataway. -, Q. How far is Mudd's house from the city? _ A. I don't know. • • Q'. How far is Surrattsville? A. About ten miles from. the Navy Bridge. t *..».„' Q, Didwyou ever near his name mentioned in the family? A. Yes. I heard the name of Mudd; Dr. Samuel Mudd, only once, I think. Q. After Booth, Surratt and Mudd returned from the passage outside, how long did you remain, together? A. About twenty minutes. „ ._,_.. Q. And then where did you all go? A. We left tbe hotel and went to the Pennsylvania House, where Dr. Mudd had rooms, and Mudd went into the sitting room and sat down with me and talked about tfie war, and expressed the opinion that it would soon come to an end and spoke like a Union man; Booth was speaking TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. withSurratt; Booth *"left, and bade us goodnight and wentout; Dr. Muddremained^herebu-tleftnextmorn- ing; he said he was. going to leave, whether he did or not I cannot say. Q. What time was It when you, separated? A. It must have been about half-past ten in the evening. J.Q. Was Booth talking when drawing those lines? A. Yes sir. Q. And Mudd and Surratt were attending? A. Yes: all three sat around the table, and looked at what Booth was marking. Q. Are you sure they were looking at, what he was drawing, or simply attending to what he was saying? A, They looked beyond Booths their eyes on the en velope, Q. how near were you to them? A. As I stated about as near as that gentleman over there, (pointing to Judge Holt). , Q. Well, now, what distance is that in feet? A- Per haps eight feet. Q. How large was the room? A. I have no means of arriving at that. ..About how large? A. I could not tell exactly how large it was. Q. I do not expect you to do that; about how large? A. About naif the sixe of this room. Mr. Pitman here asked the witness whether he meant half the room in length' and half in breadth, which would bequarterof the room, or merely half the length, with the same width. The witness then pointed to a dividing railing in the room, and said about the size from there. Q. Have you ever heard any conversation having reference to Payne's assignment to the murder of the Secretary of* State? A. No sip. Q. In what part of the room was the table situated? A. In the centre. Q. You say you saw Mr. Harold in the summer of 1862, at Mrs. Surrat's, atSurrattsville? A. It was at the time of the election of county officers; a band had gone down to serenade the officers who had been elected, and in returning they serenaded us; I also saw him in July at Piscataway Church, , and also the time at the theatre. -Q. When you left the theatre you all walked down the street together a portion of the way? A. Five of us left together.and when we came to thecorner of Tenth and E streets, we turned around, at least Surratt did, §,nasaw'the other two Were not following, and told me to go back and find them; I weat backhand found them engaged in close conversation with Booth. Q. Youmettheinat the restaurant? A. Yes. sir, and on my approaching them Booth asked me to take a drink, and introduced me to a man whose name X do not remember, but whose face is familiar, to me. Q. Did you take a drink? A. -(emphatically), Yes, sir. Q. They were all standing together when you ap proached? A. Yes. Q. Near the bar? No, sir, around the stove. Q. Was it a cold evening-? A.'Tflo.sir; there was no fire in the stove; it was a very pleasant evening, Q. Do you know whether Harold and Atzeroth had taken a drink together before you came in? A. No, sir. Q. When you left, did you all leave together? A. : Harold, Atzeroth and I left together, and overtook Surrait on Seventh street; he jnvited us to take some oysters, but Harold went down Seventh street. Q. Do you know where Harold lived? A. 1 was"at the house- qnly ouce; I don't know the precise spot. Q. You remarked sir, that at. some time when you were in company with Mrs. Surratt, a party would call to see her. Do you , remember of Mrs. Sur ratt sending a request, to have a private conversation with Booth? A. On the 2d"of Aprilsh'esentmeto the hotel and told me to tell him that she would like to see him on some pri vate business, Q. In reference to that ten dollars given you by Booth to Obtain the buggy? A. I thought It an act of friendship,. Booth bad been in the habit of keeping a buggy and had promised to let Mrs. Surratt have the loan of it, and when I went for it he said, "Here is ten dollars: goandbireone." Q. You spoke of going to Montreal : at what time was that? A. On the 18th of APKU, the Monday after tbe assassination. Q, What business had you there? A. I was seeking Surratt. ' Q, Did vqu find blm? A. No sir. Q. Did you ever see Mrs. Surratt leave the parlor to have a private interview with Booth? A. Frequently; She would go into the passage and talk with him. Q. How much time did these interviews generally occupy? A. Generally not more than five or eight minutes. . Q. Well, sir, by any conversation with her were you fver led to believe she was in secret conspiracy with tooth, or any of his confederates? Here it was remarked by a member ofthe Court that the witness had better confine himself to a statement of facts, and the question was waived by ' the cross-ex amining counsel. It was also here stated by the Court that it was a rule in the examination of witnesses that each one should be examined by one Judfe-Advocate and by only one counsel to each" prison er. Q. Did you ever transact any business for Mrs. Sur ratt ? A. I only wrote a letter to Mr. Nothy. Q. What was that? A. It was as follows:1— M?. Northy, unless you come forward and pay that bill at ©ace I will begin suit against you immediately. Q> Anything else? A. I figured some i merest sums t&a her, the interest on 0439- for thirteen years. Q. Doyou know of any interview between Atzeroth and Surratt ? A. I hav*. been there frequently at in terviews with Surratt in the parlor.- Q, Do youknow of any between Payne and Atze roth? A. Yes: on the occasion of Payne's last visit to the house Atzeroth called to see Surratt once, and they were in my room. Q, Do youknow of any conversation in reference to the assignment of Atzeroth to the assassination ofthe Vice President? A. No sir. Q. Now you say, that at 2>£o'clock on the evening of the 14th of April, you saw Atzeroth at a livery stable? A. Yes sir. , Q. Trying to get a horse; did he say what he was going to do with the horse? A. He said he was going to take a pleasure ride out in the country. Q. You say he did not get the horse? A. The stable keeper refused to let him have one. Q. Do you know whether he s ucceeded in getting one that day? A. No, sir. q. When did you part with him? A. Immediately after at the Post Office; I dropped a letter and cams oack to the stable. Q. Was that the last Interview you had with him until the assassination? A. Yessir. Q. Where did you see him again? A. In the dock there. ''._.¦- . Q. To-day? A- Yes slTi to-day. Q. You sayyoii recognized that spur as having been seen by you on the bed of Payne at the house of Mrs. Surratt. What makes you recognize it? what marks arethere that distinguish itfrom spurs in general? A, I had them in my hand. <$.' Was it the same with the knife? I understand you to < swear you sawthaft knife there; A. No, nofi that knife. , . Q. Oh the 4th of Aprildoyouknowwhere^Paynewas stopping?, Doyoq kuowanything,aboutPayrieonthat day? A. Yes, sir; Irememberthat Atzeroth and I met and I asked him where he was going, and he said he was going to get a nurse for Payne. Q. But where was Payne?. A- I don't know; I only saw him on those two occasions. Q. Where then was Atzeroth stopping ? A, I don't know. Q. Did not he speak of the place where Payne was stopping? A. No,STr.JI- Q. Do you know of his having stopped at the Hern- don House? A. I know it becau3e,Atzeroth told mefj met, him one day on Seventh street; h'esaidhe was going to see Payne*, and I asked - him If it was Payne that was at the Herndon House, and he said yes. Q, You said Payne paid a visit to Mrs. Surratt, and stopped only one night? A. Yes, sir. Q. With whom did he appear tp have business? A. He appeared to have business with Mrs: Surratt. Q. Did he' hive any other dress, going to show that he wanted to, conceal himself, that you saw? J* No, sir. v ' ' - Q. Have you seen Payne since the assassination until to-day? A. No, sir, J believe not. Q. Was he received by Mrs. Surratt as ah intimate friend? A. He was by Mrs. Surratt; he was treated as an old acquaintance on his first visit. Q. Now yon say he represented himself to be a Bap tist minister; did they regard him as a man in d issulse, or as a minister? A. On^oftheyoungladiesremarked that he was a queer looking Baptist preacher; that he wouldn't convert many souls^ Q. Did you ever see Payne and Atzer-oth in company? A. Yes; Atzeroth was at the house on the occasion of Payne's lastvisit. Q. Were you, or wereyounot at Mrs. Surratt's when Payne was arrested? A. No sir. Q. Were you in the house at s o'clock on Saturday morning, when the officers took possession? A. Yes sir. Q. Was Payne not there? then? A. No^ir. Q. I would like to know what professional employ ment you are in? A. Clerk In the office of the Com missary General of Prisoners, and have been since the 9th day >of January, 1864. Q. Colonel Hoffman's office? A. Yessir. It was here moved that the Court adjourn, hut after some discussion the adjournment was postponed. Testimony of Robert R. Jones. Robert R. Jones, sworn— Q. You are a clerk at the ^lirkwood House? A. Yes sir. Q. Look at that paper and say if It is a page taken from the register of that hotel? A. Yes sir. . Q. Doyou read upon it the name of Atzeroth? A. Yes sir, A. Yes sir. Q. Will you state whether or not some five or six weeks before the assassination of the President anyor all of these men came to your house? A. They. were there, sir. Q. All three? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did they bring to your house? A. Atzeroth came first, went on to T. B.. was gone about half an hour aud the three of them returned. Surratt, Atzeroth, and Harold. I noticed nothing with them until all three came came, when John Surratt called me into the front parlor, and then on the sofa I saw two car bines and some ammunition. Q. Anything else? A. A rope. Q. How long? A. About sixteen to twenty feet. Q. Were taese articles left at your house? A. Yes; Surratt asked me to take care of them and I told him I did not like to have these things in the house; he then called me into a room I had never seen into be fore, and showed me where I could place them under a joist.Q. Were they concealed there? A. Yes sir; I put them there myself. Q. How much ammunition was there? A. Just one cartridge box. *¦ Q. What kind of a carbine was it? A. Did'nt ex amine them; they had covers over them. Q. State whether on the Monday preceding Mrs. Sur ratt came to your house? A. I met Mrs. Surratt on the Monday previous to the assassination; when she first broached thesubjectto me I did not understand her; she asked me about theshooting irons, or something of thatkind, to draw my attention to those things; I had almost forgotten they, were there, and I told her they were hidden away; she said they would be wanting soon; I don't recollect the first question she put to me; she only referred to it in a manner, and finally came out and said they would be wauted soon. Q. Now will you state whether on the evening or day on which the President was assassinated Mrs. Surratt did'nt come to your house? A. Yes: I was out at tending a trial, and found her there when I came back; Ijudge.it was about five o'clock; I met her at the wood pile, and she told me to have them shooting irons ready that night, andsaid there would be some parties call for them that night; she gave me something in a piece of paper to keep for her, and I found it was a fie:d-glass; sae a3ked me also to have two bottles of whisky ready, saying they would be called for at night. Q, And were they called for by Booth and Harold that night? A. They both came, B;oth and Harold, and took their whisky out of the bottles; Booth did'nt come in but Harold did; It was not over a quarter after 12 o'clock; Booth was a stranger tome; Harold came in and took the whisky, but I don't think he asked tor it; he said to me. get me those things. Q. Did he not say to you what those things were? A. No; but he was apprised that already I knew they were coming for them; I made no reply, but went and got them: I gave him all the articles, with the field glass and a monkey wrench. , , Q. She told you to give them the whisky, the car bines and the field glas. A. Yes sir. Q. How long did they remain at your house? A. Not over five minutes Q. Djd they take both the carbines, or only one? A. Only one; Booth said he could not take his, because his leg was broken. Q. Did he drink also? A. Yes, while sitting in the porch: Harold carried the bottle out to him. Q. Did they say anything- about tho assassination? A. As they were leaving Booth said, " I will tell you some news; Jam pretty certain, we have assassinated tjie President -and Secretary Seward.1', Q. Was that in Harold's presence? A. I am not cer- tai n. I became so excited that I am not certain. Q. At what hour was the> news tot' the Presidents assassination afterwards received, by you? A. I sup pose it was about nine o'clock. Q. As the news spread was it spoken of that Booth was the assassin ? A. I think it was, on several occa sions. Q. Did you see the prisoner, Dr. Mudd, before? A. I never saw him before. I am not acquainted with him at all. Q. What was the exact language used when Harold asked you for ,those things? A. For God's sake make haste and get those things. > ¦ • Cross examination.— Q. At what time did you rent thehouse? A. About the 1st of December, last. Q. At the time you commenced the occupation ofthe premises did you find any arms in thehouse? A. No sir. Q. No guns or pistols? A. There was a broken gum a double barreled gun. Q, Do you keep a bar there? A. X do, sir. 30 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ; Q. Detail the first conversation you had with Mrs. Surratt on the two last times you saw her. A. It Was out of Uniontown; weJaad«assed each other; I stopped and saw it* was her a"ria got but ana' went to her buggy and she spoke to me in a matiner trying to draw my attention to those thingsT, the Carbines, but she finally came out plainer, though 1 am not quite positive, but I think she said shooting ,ia?nhs... . \ Q. Can you swear, Mr. Floyd, on your oath that she mentioned' shooting irons to you at ah ? A.I am pretty positive she did on both occasions, and I know she did on the last. Q. At what time on Friday did you -meet Mrs. Sur ratt? A. I did not meet heron Friday at all; I was out and when I returned home I found he* there. Q. Plow long did she remain after you returned ? &.. Not 'over ten minutes. Q. Now state the conversation between you and her duriogtfhose ten minutes. A. The first thingshe said was, " Talk about the devil and some of his imps will appear." Then she said, "Mr. Floyd, I want you to have the shooting irons ready, some parties will call for them to-night;" she gave me a bundle, but I didn't open it until I got up stairs, and I found it was a field- glass. Q. At what time of day bad you this conversation with Mrs. Surratt? A. I judge It was about 5 o'clock, ¦but it might have been later. She told m'e to have ¦those shooting irons ready, and I carried them and the nther things into the house. That is all the Conversa tion I had wiLh her in reference to that. I went into the barn and she requested me to fix her buggy, the spring of which had become detached from the axle. Q. Was any other person present during this inter view? A. Mrs. Offet was there. Q. Was she within hearing distance? A. I don't know; I suppose she was. Q. This was in the yard? A. Yessir. Q. Is Mrs. Offet a neighbor of yours? A. She is my sister-in-law. Q. When did you first have occasion to recollect these conversations? A. When I gave all the particu lars to Captain Burnett, the Saturday week following. Q. Was that the first time you detailed those conver ts. Did you relate any of the circumstances to any other person? A. Only to Lieutenant Lovett and Cap tain Cunningham. I told them it was through the Suirratts I got myself into difficulty, and if they hadn't ¦brought those arms to the house I would not have been in any difficulties' at all. Q. Were Lovett and Cunningham together when you told them? A. Yes. < > . Q. 'Did you talk to Mrs.' Offet about it?> A. I don't think I did; I am not so positive about that. Q. How soon alter Booth and' Harold left did you learn positively of the assassination of the President? A. I got it from them. Q. How soon after did you get it from other parties? A. About eight or nine o'clock the next morning. Q. Did you have any conversation with the soldiers In regard to it? A. Nhsir. Q. Did you tell them about Booth and Harold being at your place? A. I did h6t, and Lam only sorry that I did not. Q. Did Mrs. Surratt have any conversation with you in reference to any conspiracy? A. Never sir. - Q. Did Mrs. Surratt hand any thing to you when she 'spoke aboutthose shooting irons? A. Yes sir; the field glass. ' : Q. Have you any family? A. I have a wife. Q, Have you a son? A. No sir. - Q'. Doles'', any person work for you? A. Yea sir, a couple of colored men. > Q. Wefre&ny of them prhsent at the conversation be tween you and Mrs. Surratt? A. No sir. Q. Wasthe package handed to you by Mrs. Surratt's own hand? . A. Ye.s by herself, » Q. Where were you standing when she handed It to you? A. Near the woodpile. Here a different counsel eritered upon the task of con- tlhulhgthecross-examination rendered exceedmglvte- dious by theiihsuthcient vdice of the witness, whom tbe Court and counsel could scarcely hear. Q. Mr. Floydj, canyon recellect who it was, after Booth ahdHarold lei t the house, that first told you it was Booth who killed the President? A. I cannot; it Was spoken of In the bar-room the fiext morning and throughout the day. Q. Were the circumstances told-, and the manner in Which he did it? A. I don't rerheniber any circum stances being told. n Q Doyou know whether the soldiers who first came to thehouse knew it was Booth? ¦&. I do not; I sup pose they knew it, as they brdughtthe report from the city. Q. Mr. Floyd, howlohg before the assassination was It that the three g-ehtlemen you referred to came to your house. A. About six weeks; thev had two bugides; Surratt and DaVe Harold were in the buggies; Atzeroth came on horsebact. Q. They all came together? A. Yes. Q. Well who went down bo tlils placft called T. B? A. Surratt-SInd Atzeroth. Q. Did Harold go with them then? A. Nb: Harold was there the night -before; he had gone down the country, and told me he had come from T. B., when they all three came back. Q. How long were they gone ? A. Not over half an Q. Who handed the carbines to you.? A. JohnSUr- ratt ; when they all came into the bar. Surratt told me he wanted to see me, anh took'rhe to the front parlor, and there', oh the sofa, were the carbines. Q. Do you know which buggy they were taken from? A. I did not see anything of any arms at all until they were on the sofa. ' . , . Q. What became of the rope that was not taken away? A. It was put in the store-room with the monkey wrench. I told the Colonel all about it at the Old Capitol, and I suppose he sent for it. ,Q. Did at any time any conversation pass between you and Harold a'bout the arms. A. The night Of the assassination when he got the carbines. Q, Which road did they take? A. Towards T. B. Q. Did Booth ahd he start off together? A. They did. Q, Can you say whether it was in Harold's presence that Booth told you he.had killed the President? A. I am not sure, "because Harold rode across theyard like. Q. You were arrested on the Tuesday following? A. Yes sir. Q. Where? A. About fifteen hundred yards from T. B., oh my Way home. Q. Did Harold take a drink at the bar? A. He did. Q Did he take the bpttle back? A. H6did. ¦ Q, Did he pay for the drink? A. H6 said, "I owe you a couple ot dollars, and he gave me one dollar. Q. Was it light enough for you to observe the kind of horses they had? A. One was almost a white horse and the other was a bay. The bay was a large horse. Harold was riding on the bay. . , , Here another counsel took up the cross-examination, beginning with the oft repeated injunction to the wit ness tp speak louder. Q. Mr. Floyd, you say you met Atzeroth In company with Surratt and Harold?/ A. He came there five or six weeks before in company with Surratt. Q. Did you ever See him before that time? A. Yes; he had been to my house before. Q. Did he ever deliver to you anything? A. Never. . Q. Have you seen him since the assassination? A. Never tifliiow. Q; Did you ever see the prisoner Arnold? A. I don't know him. Q. Did.Booth take a rifle"Wiih him ? A. No sir, but Harolddid. Q. Where were the arms, then? A. They were in my bed chamber. Q. When did you bring them there? A. After Mrs. Surratt left-,1 in consequence of her order. Q. Did yougive them the carbines before they said anythiughbout shooting the President? No sir; after wards. Q. What time was it? A, A little after twelve; I woke up just before twelve o'clock; I had gone to bed about nine o'clock. Q, When the soldiers searched did you give them aid? A. I told them 1 did not know any thine about it; I should have been perfectly free if I nad given them the information they asked for. Q. Did you have any conversation with Mrs. Offet after Mrs'. Surratt went away ? A. I am hot certain; I think. I told her. Q. Where were you standing? A. Near the wood pile. The court adjourned till Monday morning. • * Washington, May 15.— The witnesses examined this afternoon showed the intimacy of Booth, Arnold and 6'Laughlin. Mr, Cox, for the defense, objected to the whole of this evidence, on the ground thatthe mere fact of inti macy was not evidence ot conspiracy. Judge Advocate Holt said they had fully established tbemtlmacvof the party in Washington, and simply proposed to show the intimacy which existed in Balti more, . The Court overruled the objection; but ordered it to be put on record. It appeared from the testimony of David Stanton thaton the night of the illumination, the 13th of Aprn, O'Laughlin was prowling in tbe house ofthe Secretary of War; but having no business there, he was ordered out. General Grant was in the parlor at that time. The Court rerhained in session until 1 o'clock. A number of witnesses were examined as to the oc currences at the theatre on the night of the assassina tion. The Charges and Specifications. The following is a copy of the charges And specifica tions against David E. JIarold, Geo. A. Atzeroth, Lewis Payne. Michael O'Laughlih, John H. Surratt, Edward TRIAL QF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 31 Spangler, Samuel Arnold. MarvE. Surratt. and Samuel A. Mudd:- Chnrge 1. For maliciously, unlawfully, and traitor ously, and in aid of the existing armed Rebellion against the United States of America, on orbe;ore the 4th day of March, A. D. 1S65. and on divers other days between that day and the loth day of April, A. D. 1865, combining, confederating, and conspiring together with one John H. Surratt, John Wilkes Booth, Jeffer son Davis, George N- Sanders, Beverley Tucker, Jacob Thompson. William C. C'leary. Clement C. Clay, George Harper, George Young, andothers unknown. within the Military Department of Washington, and within the fortified and Intrenched lines thereof, Abraham Lincoln, late, and at the time of said combinins:, confederating and conspiring, President of the United States of America, and Commander- in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof; Andrew Johnson, then Vice President of the United States aforesaid; William H. Seward, Secretary of State of the.UnitedStates aforesaid, and Ulysses S. Grant, Lieu ten ant-General ofthe Army of the States afore said, then in command of the Armies of" the United States, under the direction of the said Abraham Lin coln, and in pursuance of, and in prosecuting said malicious, unlawful, and traitorous conspiracy afore said, end in a^d of'saidRebellion, aterwards. to-wit:— On the 14th day of April, A. D..18G5, within tbe Mili tary Department ot Washington a'oresaid.and within the fortified and intrenched lines of .said Military De partment, together with thesuid John Wilkes Booth, andJohn H. Surratt, ma'iciously, unlawfully, and traitorously murdering the said Aornham Lincoln, then President of tbe United States and Commiinder- iq:Chiefof the Army and Navy of the United Statesas aforesaid, and maliciously, unlawfully, and traitor ously assaulting with intent to kill and murder the Said William H.Seward, then Secretary of State ofthe -United States as aforesaid; and lyinsjin wait with in tent maliciously, unlawfully, and traitorously to kill and murder tbe said Andrew Johnson, then being Vice-President of the United Stares, and the said Ulysses S.Grant, then being Lieutenant-General and in command of the armies of the United States as aforesaid. Specification!. In this, that they, the said David E., Harold, Edward Spangler, Lewis Payne, John H. Sur ratt, Michael O'jjaughlin, Samuel Arnold, Mary E. Surratt, Geor-ge A. Atzeroth and Samuel A. Mudd, in cited and encouraged thefeunto by Jefferspn Davis, GeorgeN. Sanders.BeverleyTucker; Jacob Thompson, William C. Cleary, Clement C. Clay, Geonre Harper, George Young, and others unknown, citizens of the United States aforesaid, and who were then engaged in armed Rebellion against the United states ot America, within the limits thereof, did, inaidofsnid armed Re bellion, on or before the 6th day of March. A. D. 18(15, and on divers other day and time between that day and the 15th day of "April, A.D'. 1865, com bine, confederate and conspire together at Wash ington city, within the Military Depart m cnt. and within the intrenched fortifications and military lines of the said United States, there being unlawfully, maliciously, and traitorously to kill and murder Abraham Lincoln, then President ofthe United States aforesaid, and Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof, and unlawfully, mali ciously, and traitorously to kill and murder Andrew Johnson, then "Vice-President of the United States, u|»on whom on the death of said Abraham Lincoln, after the 4th day of March. A. D. 1SG5. the office of Pre sident of the said United States, and Commander-in- Chief of tbe Army and Navy thereof, would devolve, and to unlawfully, maliciously, and traitorously kill and murder Ulysses S. Grant, then Lieutenant- General under the direction of the said Abraham Lincoln in command of the Armies of the United States aforesaid: and unlawfully, maliciously, and traitorously to kfil and murder Wfil^iam H.Seward, the Secretary of State of the United States afore said, whose duty ijt was by law upon thedeath,of said President and Vice President of the United States aforesaid, to cause an election to be held for'electors of President of the United States, the conspirators aforesaid designing and intending by .the killing and murder of tbe said Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson,. Ulysses S. Grant and William 'H. 'Seward aforesaid, to deprive tbe army and navy p'f the said United States of a constitutional commander-in-chief, and to deprive the armies of the United States of 'their lawful comm,ander,'and to prevent a lawful election of President and' Vice President of the United States aforesaid, and by the means aforesaid to aid and com fort the insurgents engaged in armed rebellion against thasaid United States as aforesaid, and thereby to aid In the subversion and overthrow of the said United States ' And being so combined, confederated, and conspiring together In the prosecution of such unlawful and trai torous conspiracy, on the night of the' 14th day of April A. D., 1865, at the hour of about 10 o'clock and 15 minutes P. M„ at Ford's Theatre on Tenth Street, in the city ot Washington, and within the Military De partment and military lines aforesaid, John Wilkes Booth, one of tbe conspirators aforesaid, in pursuance of said unlawful and traitorous conspiracy, did then andthereunlawfully.maliclously, traitorously and with intent to kill and murder the said Abraham Lincoln, discharge a pistol ,'.• held In the hands of bun, tjie said Booth, the same being then loaded with powder and a, leaden ball, against and upon the left and posterior s:deof the bead of Abraham Lmcdln. and did thereby then and there Inflict upon him, the said Abraham Lincoln, then President of the said United Stales and Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof, a mortal Wound, whereof afterwards, to wit, on the 15th day of April, A. D. 1865, at Washington City afore? said, tnesaid Abraham Lincoln died, and therebv then and there, in pursuance of said1 conspiracy, the said defendants, and the said John Wilkes Booth, did un lawfully, traitorously. °nd maliciously, and with tho intent to aid the Rebellion as afbresaidi murder the President ofthe United States' as aforesaid, In lurther prosecution of the unlawful, traitorous conspiracy aroresaid,and of the murderous and traitor ous intent ofsaid conspiracy, thesaidEdward Spangler, en the said 14th day of April, A. IX 38(15, at about the same hour of that day as aforesaid, within said mili tary department and the military lines^afo.resaid, did aid'andassist the said John Wilkes Booth to obtain en trance to the box in said theatre in which said Abrar ham Lincoln was sitting at the time he was assaulted and shot as aforesaid by John Wilkes Booth, and a'so d d then and there aid said Booth In barring and, ob structing the door of the box of said theatre so as to hinder and prevent any assistance to or rescue of the said Abraham Lincoln against tbe murderous assault of' the said John Wilkes Booth, and did aid and abet him in making his e'scape after the said Abraham Lincoln, had been murdered in manner aforesaid. Andin further prosecution of said unlawful, murder-: ous and traitorous conspiracy, and in pursuance there- or, and with the inteDt as aforesaid, tbe taid David FJ. Harold, on tbe night of the Utb of April, A. D. 1865, within the Military Department and military lines a'oresaid. abet and assist the said John Wilkes Booth in the killing and murder ofthe said Abraham Lin coln, and did ih^n and there a-id^a^d abet and assist him, the c aid John Wilkes Booth, In attempting-to es cape through the military lines aforesaid,, and accom pany and assist the said John Wilkes Booth in at tempting to conceal himself and escape from justice after killing andmurdering the said Abraham Lincoln as aforesaid. And in further prosecution of said unlawful and trai torous 'conspiracy, and of the intent thereof as afore said, the said Lewis Payne did, on the same night of the 14th dav of April, A.D. I8fi5, about tbe same hom of 10 o'clock 15 minutes P. M-, at the city of Washing ton, and within themilitary department and military lines aforesaid,, unlawfully and maliciously make an assault upon ihe said William H. Seward,, Secretary oi State as aforesaid, in the dwelling hfruse and bed-cham* her of him, the said William H. Seward; and there, with a lar^e knife held in his band,' unlawfully, trai torously, and in pursuance of the said' conspiracy, strike, stab, cut. and attempt to kill and murder the said William H. Seward, and did thereby, then and there, and with the intent aforesaid, with said knife inflict upon the face and throat of the said William H. Seward divers grievous wounds; and the said Lewis Payne, in further prosecution of the said conspiracy, at the Fame thne aod place last a'f'oresaia, did attempt, with the knife aforesaid, and a pistol held inhisband,tok;ll and murder Frede rick W. Seward, Augustus W. Seward, Emerick W. Hansen, and Georfre F. Robinson, win were then striving; to protect and rescue the said Will'am H-. Se ward f: om murder by the said Lewis Payne,, and, did, then and there, with the said knife and pistol held 'n his h.and, inflict divers wounds upon the head of the said Frederick W- Seward, and upon the persons pi the said Augustus W. Seward, Emerick W. Hansell, and George F. Robinson. And in the further prosecution ofthe said conspiracy and its traitorous and murderous designs, the said Geo. A. Atzeroth did, on the night ofthe 14th of April, A.D. 18R5, and about the same hour of the night aforesaid, within the military department.and the military lines aforesaid, lie in wait for Andrew Johnson, then Vice President of the United States aforesaid, with the in tent unlawfully and maliciously to kill and murder him, the said Andrew Johnson. And in the further prosecution of the conspiracy aforesaid, and of its murderous and treasonable pur poses aforesaid, on the night of the lstb and Hth of April, I8u5. at Washington City. arid within the mili tary lines aforesaid, tbe said Michael O'Laughlin did then arid there liein wait for Ulysses S. Grant. And in the further prosecution ofthe said conspiracy, the said Samuel Arnold did, within the .military de partment and military lines aforesaid, on or about the 6th day of March, A. D. J sis. and on divers: other days and times between that day and the loth day of April, A. b. 1865. combine, conspire with and aid, counsel and abet, comfort and support the said John Wilkes Booth, Lewis Pavne,' George A. Atzeroth, Michael O'Laugh- lin. and their confederates in the :said unlawful, mur derous and traitorous conspiracy, and in the execution thereof as aforesaid. Andin the further' prosecution of the said conspi racy, Mary E. Surratt did, at Washington City, and * 32 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. within the military department and military lines arortsaid, onor be ore the 6tb day of March, A D. 3865, and at divers other days and times between that day and the 20th day of April, A. D. 1865, receive, entertain, harbor and conceal, aid rnd arsist. the said John W'lkes Booth. David E. Horold, Lewis Payne John H. Surratt. Michael O'Laughlin. George A. Atzeroth Samuel Anr 11, ard their confederates, with a knowledge of the murderous and traitorous consplraey a'cre;aid. and with intent- to aid, f.bet and assist them in the execution thereof; andin escaping from justice after the murder of the said Abraham Linco'n, asa'bresMd, with intentto aid, abet and assist them in the execution, thereof, and in escaping from justice after the murdor of the said Abraham Lincoln, in pursuance of the said conspiracy, in the, manner aforesaid. . Byorderof the President of the United States. J. HOLT. Judge Advocate-General. Proceedings of Monday, May 15. On Saturday it was moved that if the record created no objection on the part of the Judges Advocate, or of the counsel for any or all of the accused, the presence ofthe seve-al witnesses heed not be considered of ma terial necessity. Mr. Aiken, assistant counsel for Mrs. Surratt, ex pressed his willingness to accede to such an arrange ment, -except in the case, of Weichman. whom he desired present not, however, that the witness might hear the record of his testimony read, but that he might re-examine him on new ground, which, as he alleged, had been 'brought forth in tbe examination of the subseouejit witnesses. ¦ Itwas decided by the Court that the reason so stated didinot justify the delay that the finding and reca'ling of Weichman would occasion, and the reading of the record was proceeded with. After a time Mr. Weichman entered and heard the reading of the portion, ,pf his cross-examination con ducted by Mr. Ewing, and several corrections made. .Mr. Johnson. thesrniorcounsel of Mrs. Surratt. when the whole of the testimpny rendered bv Mr. Weich man bad been read from the record, applied to be per mitted to ask of him some question be'ore be retired. This was objected toby Major-General Wall-ace. The President then jemarked that the witness had been already exarriined^ynthe councel. and a fair oppor tunity auVrded. The Judsje Advocate General then asked whether it was to be a cross-oxamation. and being told by the counsel that it was. the Court, under the Advocate's suggestion, determined that ashe could caU up the witnesshereafter ofthe de'ense, it would be an economy of time. General Wallace withdrew his objection, add'n**, h'wever, that hedidpo only for mistime. H«Sa:d:— 'I placed mv objection on the ground that theVe objections would prove intermina- blP,unlcsistonped by some rule, after counsel have once had a full opportunity for cro'ss-examlnation Examination by Hon. Beverdy Johnson— Q. I under stood you to say on Saturday f- at, you went with Mrs. Surratt the firrsttimetori' Tuesday before the assassi nation, in a bu/rgy. Dp, you recollect whether you stopned on the wav to Surrattsville? ' A. Yes sir. .Q."Where? A. We stopped on two or three occa sions. >. Q. Did you stop at unjontownl A. I do not know the particular pbint, whether it was at .Union town or not. Q. Did you stop at a village? A. We stopped on the road at no parti ularvii'age that I remember. Q. How do you know Mr. Floyd? A. I have met him three ttmes. ,Q. Did you know him as the keeper of thehotel? A. I knew him as the man who bad rented Mrs. Sur ratt's house from/her, because I copied off the instru ment. Q. Do yon recollect seeing him buy a bugcyonthe way -from Washington to Surrattsville, on Tuesday? A. Yes. sir: wo met hi^ carriage;, it drove past us: Mrs. Surratt called to Mr, Floyd; Mr. Floyd got out and ap proached the buggy; Mrs. Surratt put her head out and had a conversation with him. Q. Did you bear It? A. No sir. Q. Did you hear rny thing about shooting-Irons? Question objected to by Assistant Judge Advocate Blncrbam.. The question was then withdrawn. Witness— T heard nothing mentioned about shooting irons; Mrs. Surratt spoke to Mrs. OfTatt about bavin-; this man, Howell, take the oath of allegiance and get released, and said she was going to apply to General Augur or Jud^e Turner for that, purpose. Q, How lcnj was that interview between Mr. Flovd and Mrs. Surratt on that occasion? A. Tbafl couldn't Say exactly; I don't think It was more than five or eight minute i; I don't carry a watch myself, and I have no precise means of knowing. By Judge'Hblt— Q,. I understood you to say you did notbearfhe whole of this conversation? A. I did not hearthe conversation between Mr. Flbyd^and Mrs. Surratt; Mrs. Surratt spoke to Mr. Floyd at some dis tance from the buggy, and I couldn't hear it. By Mr. Johnson— Q. Doyou recollect whether It was raining at that time? A. I don't think it was raining at that particular time: it was a cloudy, murky day; I , cannot fay whether it was raining or not; I don t re- mThebreadine ofthe record was resumed, and being finished by half-past one. the Court took a recess. After the recess, Jo!- n M. Lloydwas recalled, and asked if he could 'identify the ™rbmes shown to him as tht» n-es rplerred to in his prev oustestimonv.' w!tness-Tiie one with Ihecover on I do not recog nize I do not Ibink the cover looks VHt^hKS-1! was a kind of grey cloih; the other looks like s the one I saw; I rccopnTze the fixture 'or breech-loading, -vs hich attracted mv attention, and which I examin a, mm Court will allow me i wish to make abatement. When I was examined before I stated that itwas on Monday when I met Mrs. Surratt at Unlontown. I wr.s con fused by mv being summoned to Court on two s icces- sive Mondays. The first Monday 1 was summoned tp Court I did not go. I met Mrs. Surratt at Liiiontown; the next d'av after I went to Court, and con equently it must have been on the Tuesday after the second Men- day I was summoned. I alpo wish to make another siatement. I testified in mv last examination that I was not certain whether I carried the bundle riven me by Mrs. Surratt ups' airs or not. I cannot now recol lect-distinctly, but I think it likely I laid it on the sofa in the dining r^nm. By Judpe-AdvocateHolt.— Q. You are sure it was the same bundle yon examined here? A. Yes. sir, I am sure it was theeame bundle. By Mr. Aiken.— Q. D,:d I understand yon to sav you vere in liquor at tbetime you -had this converation with Mrs. Surrntt ? A. I was somewhat in liquor, as I think I told von on Saturday. ; Q. And on that ar count is it that you are at fault in vcur testimony, and w'sh to nvike this exp'anat'on? A. I was not postive whether I carried the bundle up stairs or not. The question was unexpected. If r bad expected it, I might have recollected more distinctly in my former examination. Testimony of Mary Vantlne. Examined by JudgpHolt.— Q. Doyou reside in the city of Washington? A. I do; at No. 420 G street. Q. Do vou keep rooms for rent? A. I do. Q. Will you look at the prisoners at the bar and state whether, in the montb of February la^t, you saw any of them; and if eo, which? A. Two of those gon- tlemeji had rooms at my house, Arnold and O'Laugh lin. * Q. What time in February did they take rooms In your house? A. As near as I can recollect it was on the 10th. I cannot state positively the date. Q. Did you know J. "Wilkes Booth in his lifetime? A. I knew him by his coming to my house to see gen tlemen who had rooms there. Q. D.d be or not comevery often to seethe prisoners, O'Laui'hlin and Arnold? A. Yes, frequently. • Q. Would ho remain for agoodwhile inconversation w:th them? A. Asa general thing he would go into their rooms and I could see nothing further of them. Q. Did these prisoners leavethecityandreturn seve ral times? A. They left on Saturday to go to theur homes, as I understood, in Ba'timore. Q. Do you know whether Booth accompanied them or not? A. I think not. Q. Were these interviews between Booth and Ihem alone or was Booth accdrrjpanied by other persons? A. I never saw any one with him. Q. They told you his inrae was J. Wilkes Booth, did they? A. Yes. Arnold did; I inquired who he was and he sa*d J. Wilkes Booth. Q. Did he call f< r them frequently and not find them in? A. Yc; sometimes.- Q. Did he manifest much anxiety to see them on these occasions? A. Frequently; when thev were away ho would call three or Jour times before they would return; he would appear very anxious to see them. Q. Would he on 'such occasions leave messages for them? A. Sometimes he would request, if they came in before h° called again, to say that thev would find him at the stable: sometimes he would go into their room and write a note. Q. Look at the photograph now shown you, and say ifyou recognize it as the man you call Booth? A. L cannot see without my glasses (glasses. brought In and handed to witness); I should not call it a good likeness; I recognize it as Booth, but like a very poor likeness. Q. Doyou remember the last time Booth played in this city, about the ISth or 20th of March. A Yes Q. Did these prisoners present you with compli mentary tickets for the play that night? A Yes I expressed a wish to see him, and O'Laughlin cave me the tickets. Q. Did there seem to be any difference in the inti macy or bis association with these two men, and if so, with which was he the most intimate? A. I can't say. He would sometimes inquire lor one, and sometimes tortile .other, though I think he more frequently in quired lor O'Laughlin. Q. Did you oversee any arms in their room? A. I saw a pistol once, and but once. Q. Do you remember at any time seeing a man call A very rough looking person— a laboring man or mechanic? A. Not a laboring man. There was a man I who usad to come sometimes. I think he passed one TRIAL OF THE' ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 33 3 night with them, from his coming out very early in the morning. Q. Do youknow his name? A. I would know him if I saw him; he was what woujd be called a respect able-looking mechanic, not what j/ou\would call a gentlemap. Q. Could you describe him at all? A.: Not very mi nutely; hisskin was hard, as If it had been exposed to the weather. Q. Do you recognfee him as among the prisoners at the bar? A. No; Q. Did these prisoners seem to have any business transactions with Booth, and if so, of what character? A. Theysaid they were in the t oil trade. Q, Did they seem to have an extensive correspon dence? Djd many letters come to them? A. Not a great many. Q. Where did they generally come from? A. I never noticed ; they were brought in and laid down. Q. They were addressed to the names of O'Laughlin and Arnold, were they? A. Yes; sometimes to one andsometimes to the other. Q. Yon say Booth came sometimes by day andsome times at night? A. Not frequently at night; I do hot know as ever I saw him at night; he might have come there without my seeinghim; I slept in the back part of thehouse and persons might come out the front part df the hou^e without my seeing them. Q. You do not know whether, when they went out and stayed late at night, they were with Booth or not ? A. No. Q*. You have not seen them since the time they left your house? A. No. Q, Which was about the 20th of March? A. I think so; it was the Monday after the Saturday on which Booth played. -> Q,.- Did you ever see Booth ride out in the evenings with these men? A. No, I do Dot think I ever did. I <£ould not positively say whether I did or not. He fre- juentlycame to my house in a carriage and inquired :or them. I never saw them, that I recollect, ride out together. t Cross-examined by Mr. Coxe.— Q. Did these prisoners say they were or had been in the oil business? A. They said that they were in. - Q. Was that during the first or latterpartof the time they occupied a room at your house? A. I think they had been there two or three weeks, Q. Did they say anything when they went away from y«ur house, where they were going? A. To Pennsyl vania. Q. Did they say anything about having abandoned the oil business? A. No; not that I recollect. Q.-Were they much in their rooms, or were they moving about? A. They, were not in their room a great deaL Q. Did they occupy it regularly at night? A. They were out sometimes. Q. Do you fix the 20th of March as the day they left? A. If you can ascertain what night Booth played I can tell you; it was tbe Monday following. Q. Was Ptscara the play? A. Yes. Q. You cannotspeak with certaintyof anybodybelng with them besides Booth? A. No, not anybody tnat I know; others may have gone into their room, I could not say in regard to that. 1f.Q. I ask you whether Booth!s visits were most fre quent I'd February! or the latter part of the time they were there in March? A. I think they were pretty much the same all through the time they were there; he was a pretty constant visitor. Q. Were you present at any conversations between fchein? A. No, I was not. Q. You never heard any of their conversations? A. No. Q. Did they room up stairs? A. No, In the back parlor. Testimony of Henry Willfams (Colored!). Q. State to the Court whether you are acauainted with the prisoners O'Laughlin and Arnold; look and see if yru remember to have seen them before? A. I know Mr. O'Laughlin, butnot Mr. Arnold. Q. Did you ever meet Mr. O'Laughlin, and where? A. In Baltimore. Q. When was that? A. In March last; I carried a letter to him. Q. From whom did yon carry the letter to him? A. From Mr. Booth. Q. John Wilkes Booth, the actor? A. Yessir. Q. Did you carry the letter to him alone, or to him and Arnold?. A. I carried one to Arnold and gave it to a lady, andshe said she would give it to him. Mr. Coxehere said that unless this question was to be followed up be would object to it. The objection of the counsel was overruled, and, the examination proceeded. Q. So you delivered It at tbe boarding bou^e of O' Laughlin ? Did he tell you where O'Laughlin lived? fA. He said on Exeter street.' Q. But did you carry a letterto Arnold? A. No, sir, Icarried one up there to the house: I did not know who itwas fbr,mysclF. Q., Who Irom ? A, Mr. Booth gave it tome ;' he first called me and asked me, if I would take a letter down there: I didn't know for whom it was; be first told me to carry it to the number that was on the letter. Q. You carried morethan one? A. Two. Q. To whom did you deliver the second? A. To Mr, O'Laughlin. a Do you know for whom it was? A, He told me it was for Mr. O'Laughlin; I knew Mr. O'Laughlin, and was glad when I saw him in the theatre, because it saved me night walking. Q. For whom did O'Laughlin say the letter was. A. Well. I said hereis a letter Mr. Booth gave me for you, and that was all. Q. Booth toldyou then this letter was rorO'Laughlln? Mr. Cox here remarked again. I must object to this evidence, as it is not followed up as to what he did after the receipt. The Judge Advocate-General remarked that the object wossiraply to show the intimacy of those men by their correspondence. Mr. Cox said he objected to any evidence of Booth's seudinir a letter to any individual. It was simply an act of Booth's own, to which the defendant was not privy. The Judge Advocate-General then said that they did not offer the letter in evidence at all, but simply, their correspondence with each other. The objection was finally entered upon the record, butwas overruled by the Court. Q. When did I understand you to say this letter was parried ? A. It was in March. 'Q. Are you sure? A. Yes sir, in March last. Q. Late or early in March? A. About thehiiddle of themopth; Twas coming along, there near'the mine ral water store, and he said,, couldn't I take a note for him; I said I could; I had to go in front; be said forme tb take the note abd he wduld pay me; I asked him where, and he said to Fayette street. Q, You said something about the theatre; what theatre? A. The Holliday Street Theatre. Q: You say you found O'Laughlin in the theatre; what part of the theatre?1, A. In the, dress circle, in the afternoon. Q, How did you find him? A. I went up with Pitch, and found him there. Q. All you know about It Is that you. just gave the note to him and came away? A. Yes, sir. Q. When Booth gave you the other letter, that was not for O'Laughlin? A. No, sir; that was for a house in in Fayette Street. He just gave me the number of the house. Q. He did not ,tell you who it was addressed to? A. No, sir. Testimony of J- P. Early. J. P. Early sworn. Q. Do you know the prisoners, O'Laughlin and Ar nold? A. I know O'Laughiln. 0> Have you been on the cars with them coming from Baltimore to this city? A. Yes, with O'Laughlin; on the Thursday previous to the assassination. Q. Was Arnold on the cars? A, No sir, not to my knowledge, at least. Q. That was the day previous to the assassination? A. Yes, Thursday, the nifeht of the illumination. Q. Do you know wherehe went to stay after you ar rived? A. There wore four ot us, and when we stopped to get shaved between Third and Four-and-a-half streets, he asked me to walk down as far as the Na tional Hotel with hira. Q. Did he take a room there? A. No sir, he did not. Q. Did you see him associate with Booth? A. No sir, I never saw Booth but once, and that was upon the stafte. Q. Did he make any Inquiry for Booth? A. I did not hear him. Q. Did you see O'Laughlin during that day ? A. I was with him the greater partof that day. Q. Where? A. We Slept at the Metropolitan that night, and then went to Welch's and had- breakfast f'orfour of us; as we were passing the National , Hotel. I stoppeito go to the water-closet; when I came .out I met Mr. Henderson, who said he was waiting for Mr. O'Laughlin, who had gone up stairs to see Booth; we waited three-quarters of an hour, and he not coming down, we went out. Q. When did you see him again? A. About four o'clock. . Q> What time did he gb to see Booth? A. I should say it was about noon, perhaps. Q. What was the latest hour at which you saw him on Friday? A. 'I don't recollect exactly; X had been been drinking, considerably, but I distinctly recollect I saw him come out of a restaurant pretty late; I can't gay whether it was after the assassination. Q. Can you give tbe name of the restaurant? A. I believethe name, at present, is '"Lee Shore." -, Q. Did you see him at the time or immediately after you heard of the assassination ofthe President? A. I can't say I did; I went to bed short 'y after that; I think I distinctly recollect his coming out with Fowler. . Q. Who is Fowler? A. I dqu't know, exactly; he used to be employed by O" Laugh lin's'brother once. Q. Did O'Laughlin go to. Baltimore the next day? A. Yes, on the three or half-past three, o'clock train; I forget which it is. ; Q. Where did he go to in Baltimore? A. Well, after we arrived we went down Baltimore street, as far as High, down to Fayette, and from there we went and u TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. toO'Laughlin's; going down, we meth'a DSbther on the way, who told O'Laughlin that therp toad been par ties ipoking for him; he asked me if I would wait, and then heasked'mein; he than w,ent pp, and said he was not going to stay home that night. . Q, Did hasnow much, excitement a.bput the assassi nation? A. I can't say he did, but hisbrpthersajdhe would be after him On account of his intimacy with Booth. Cross-examination bv Mv. Cox.— Q. Who was with O'Laughlin; besides yourself? A. There was,Henderspn, Edward Murphy and myself Q. What, was your purpose In coming down? A. We came to have A Utile good time, and to see the illumi nation. Q. Did he jphi you in Baltimore? A. He came with Henderson. Q. Where did you stay on Thursday night? A- -A-t the National Hotel. Henderson, me and Smith stopped In one roomrand as O'Laughlin signed the register last they gave him a room to, himself. Q. Who arranged to sleep separately? A. Well, he was. the man who signed last, and tbe clerk gave him that room. Q. How. late were you, up that night ? A. It was about '2 o'clock on Friday morning. Q. Was it you who woke him In the morning? A. Yes, sir, and then we went down and got breakfast. Q-'Whefe? A. At Welch's, on the avenue, near Tenth street, and after breakfast we went back, about lp o'clock, to the National Hptel. , Q. Didyou hear hirh. state what he was going to see Booth for, or that he was going to see Booth at all? A. No sir. notat thattime. Q. Did Booth come down ? A. He did not. Qi. Yqudan't know whether he actually saw Booth or' not? A. I do.not,sir; we remained in the he telthree- quarrrers of an hour waiting for him, and he not com ing dow,n, Henderson concluded to go, hut as. we went out he had some cards written by the card-writer there; we walked down the avenue, I thuik.as far as the "Lee Shore," and he not being there we went. back and got the cards that the writer had written for Hen derson; he wrote my name on asamplecard; we then proposed to send cards to Booth's room, as a hint to O'Laughlin to come down; the cards were returned. as there was nobody hi the rpqrn. ¦ , Q. How long during that day was O'Laughlin in your company? A. We took a stroll around the city, in dif ferent parts of it, and; had djinnw again at Welch's. Q>. Dm you stroll around together? A. Yessir.- Q. You djned at Welch's? A. Yessir. (a. Atwhat'hour? A. Between twelve and two. Q. Do you know Stern's clothing store? A. Yes sir. Qi Was it over that? A. No sir. I think it was fur ther up the avenue. Q. What time did you get through dinher? A. It took us over an hour. Q.. Where did you go after dinner? A. Around town again, and we went on a visit Q. Was O'Laughlin with yqu all the time? A. I can't say he was after dinner, but I recollect that between four and five o'clock ho went with me to a friend s house. Q> To pay a visit? A. Yes sir; and we had dinner a second time. Q. That was on Friday? A. Yes sir. Q. How soon did you leave there? A. We left there about 6 o'clock; » Q. You are not certain that O'Laughlin was with you all the afternoon? Youdon't suppose he was with you between the first and second, dmners? A. I ami not positive; I think we1 separated, O'Laughlin and Henderson going one way, and Michael and myself another. Q. You are not certain? A. No sir. Q. After G o'clock where did ypu go? A. After we came up from tbe place nearthe Baltimore depot. where we had paid the visit, we returned to the Lee Shore House, and were then joined by the other two. Q. How late was that? A. Idon't exactly recollect. We stayed around there until between 7and a o'clock, and then wensback to Welch's and had supper. We were there at the time the procession passed uPtbe aVenuetofhe"Navy-Yard.r' Q. What time was that? A. Between eight and nine o'clock. Q.'How late did you stay there? A. Until our supper was ready: we then went to tbe Lee Shore House. Q. Did you stay there till you went to bed? A. I did. Blr. Q. Do I understand you to say you were thereafter the assassination? A Yessir. Q. Where is thehouse?' A. Between Third and Four- and-a-halfetreets, nearthe Globe. office; theseconddoor I believe from the Globe office. Q. Didyou speak to O'Laughlin wheuhewaaincomi- pany with Fowler? A. Yessir. Q- Was not that after you received" the news ofthe assassination? A. I am not certain. Qi Were you all there? A. Yes sir. * A Where did you stay that, night? A. I staid at that house. • ., *• ^ , r * Q. Did O'Laughlin? A. Not that I know of. ' Q. Had you bean drinking? A- Yes sir. Q. Now cnarge your memory whether it was after the n,ew$! of the. assassination reached you of not? A. Isho.uJdjudseitwas'ftbo.utioo'clock. Q. Where was Murphy?- A. He had left us in the avenue. , , „ . Q. He was nfct with -you at that time? A. No sir. ¦ Q. Where was Henderson? A- In the bar-room, I believe. ' ' Q. Now I will ask you when you came down on Thursday, whether the whole party had not arranged to go hack on Friday? A. Yes, that was the intention; at least I understood so. Q. During this visit did you, see anything in O'Laugh- lin— anything desperate, which would lead you to sup pose Objected to by the Assistant Judge Advocate Bng^ hum. Q. How was, his, conduct? A. The same as. I ever. saw; he was rather jovial. Q. Was he in good spirits? A. Very much so, com ing down to tbe cars. Q. Any nervousness? A. No sir. . Q. IwdLaskyiou whether you were near Willard's Hotel during Friday, or Friday evening ? A. We were not as far up as Whlardis, I think; I don't recollect passing there. Q. What induced you to stay later than you inr tended? A- Well, it was the liquor, Q.. pidn't Lieutenant Henderson press you to stayt Tlie question was objected to i>y Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham, on Lbegroundthatitwasacross- examination as to Henderson, whose name was not on the record ye(;.* Major-General Lew Wallace remarked that Mb, Henderson himself could be brought into Court. The Cqurt asked. Mf. Cox if the question was with drawn, to which Mr. Cox replied— No, sir. The objection, however, was sustained by the Cour% , Q,. You stated that probably the liquor kept yoo tjbere. Now I will ask you if anything else did J A. I canuotsay. Q. Sjate what- time you went up to the depot In the mottling? A. We did start to go at eleven onSatur- day morning, and went as far as the depot, andHender- sonwentand got the tickets, but Henderson finally con cluded to stay over the, afternoon; O'Laughlin was wanting to go up to BaltirnoEe; and said I to Hender-r son.iryou.press, him to s^ay, he will, and so we all concluded, to stay u ntil three in the evening. Q. Then you went up at three in the evening? A. Yes sir. Q. You say you met his brother., and that he satd paj-tieswerelo&fciugfor him? A- Yes, I remember the remark he made, that h,a would not like to be an rested in her house; that it would be the death of his mo thei-; his b&other-tn?law went with us to the cprner of Fayette and Exeter streets; we stopped there and bad a conversation, and I told him he had better stay at home, and that those parties would probably cpuj-e again. Ho j?a;d:— No, it would be the death ofhu mother, and asked mo to go up town with him, and I went up, but I do not recollect the name of the street; we got into the car», and when we got out we returned Ijoiiig. Examination in Chief Resumed. By Judge Holt :-Q. Do you know the hour that O'Laughlin joined you on Thursday? A. We all tour wentijnto the hp.tel together. Q. At what hour? A. About one or two o'clock. Q. OnFridaymornipg? a. Yes. Q. Where had you been tbe previous part of tha night? A, After supper we went to see the illumina tions, and went a considerable distance up tho avenue* and then turned back, and, at the invitation of Mr Henderson, went into the Canterbury Music HalL Q. All of you? A. All of us. Q. Did you all continue together? A. Yes sir a. Did you go siny where else? A. No sir. , Didn't you go on K street or Lslreat? A.Nosirl can t say; I don' t know where that street is myself; ' Q. Cun you state where you were besides at the Can terbury? A. ^.rterwards? Q No; before that. A. Wo had supper previous to that and took a, walk up the avenue »v*v>ua w Testimony of Lieutenant Henderson. Q. State whether you are acquainted with the prir sonerO'Lau,ghlip? A- Yessir. v * Q Did you see Mm In this city on Friday,' Aptd 14th* A. Yessir, pn Thursday and Friday. J' l w *""* .Q-^" you know whether on, either of those days, ha visited Booth? A. He-told me on Friday that SwS to scfcbrm in the morning. ^ * Cross-eafamlnation by Mr. Cox.-Q. Did he tell yon ¦ he was to see him, or that he went to see him? A. He &aid he was to see him on Friday ' Sk_AsJLh(? h?d *Q engagement to see him? A. Ho onlV said he was to seo him; I can't say wh^hffl he bad aii engagement,or not. ^ ^* . & Si? V?Wl you wbat *or? a. No sir. Q. 1 hat is all you know about it? A, That is, all, Ste Testimony of Samuel K. J. Stvegv. Q. Explain to the Court how long you have known 0' Laushlinr A. I have known him for yearsT &uown TRIAL 0$ TEE ASSASSINS AT, WASHINGTON. 35 Q. Did you see him in the month of April last before the assassination? A. I can't be positive about its being April, but it was well on to the 1st or April. Q. Did you see hi m with Booth? A. 1 did Q. Did the association between them seem to' be' of an intimate nature? A. It did. Q. Didyouseetliemconver.se in an intimate man ner? A. I did. Q,. Where was that? A. I don't know the house; it was on the rij-ht hand side of the avenue as you go up to the Treasury Department. Q. Inside? A. No. outside. Q. Were they alone by themselves? A. There were three of the party. Q. Did the third party take any part In^the conver sation? A. I think Booth was the speaker, and the other party thelistenr. Q. Did they suspend their conversation wh^n you approached? A. O'Laughlin did. He called me on one side and said Booth was busy with his friend talk ing privately. Q. Do you know this man? A. No sir. Q. Describe him. A. He was about my height, with curly hair; he was in a stooping position, as it" talking- Co Booth ; I thought it ill manners to go too near them. Q. Do you recognize auy of the prisoners as toeing the m£ua*j Tiie witness scrutinized the prisoners in the dock, and answered ; — In their present dress, I would'nt swear to any. Theqnestion was objected to, and the objeotion was' sustained. Q. Have you any opinion as to whether- either of these is the man? A. I feel it my duty to detect the m»n. but it is a de.icate question. No sir, i wi.'l uot swear that the man is there. Q. State whether 3'ouare tbe person reported tohave Been Booth .and Harold on the night ofthe assassina tion? A. I don't know Harold, audi neversaw Booth but once a/ter that. Cross-examination by Mr. Cox.— Q. You say vou saw this conference at the bouse on the avenue? Can, you tell where the house is? A. I paid no attention to the locality; it is between Ninth and Eleventh streets, to the.best of my recollection; I know I was going up to Eleventh street. Q. Can you speak with any certainty as to the date? A. Icouidifl had the passes that I obtained. Then I could come nigh to it; but I can't how say positively as to the date. Q. Might it not have been that you asked O'Laugh lin to take a drink, and he have replied that Booth was busy with a friend? A. Well, I am in no ways stingy: I might have doneso. Q. And wu&t was his answer in reply to your invi tation to take a drink? A. I don't know. Testimony of I>. S. Spragrne. By Judge Holt.— Q. You have been a clerk at the Kirkwood House? A. Yes sir. Q. Were you- present when the room was broken openafter the assassination? A. Yes sir. <$,. State- what was found there? A. All I saw was a revolver. Q. Do you recol lect that in the course of the day some men called to inquire for Atzeroin? A. No sir, I do not. Cross-examination by Mr. Doster.— Q. When were you at the desk? A. I came off outy at 12 in the morn ing. Q. Did you observe anybody calling and asking for Atzeroth? A. No sir. Testimony of E>avn*l Stanton. Q. Look upon the prisoner, O'Laughlin, and state to the Court whether you ever saw hi hi before, and if so, whep and where. A. I have. seen him. Q. Which Is be? A. That is him; he sits there be tween two soldiers. Q, State when and where you saw him? A. Tbe night be. ore the assassination? at the house of theSec- re.aryof War; I simply saw him there; he remained some moments, till I requested iiim to £0 out, Q. Didyou have any conversation with him in the house? A. I asked Mm what his business was, rind he asked where the Secretary was; I said, he was standing on" the stoop. Q. Did he ask for anybody else but the Secretary? A. No. Q. Bid he offer anv explanation while there? A. No; at first -I fchoughtbe was intoxicated; but found after wards thathe was not. . Q. Wa§ General Grant there that night ? A. Yes, in $b'e room. Q. Did he ask in regard to him? A. I don't recol lect that he did. a. Did he go when you told him ? A. Yes, sir. . At* what hour was that? A. At io>^ o'clock; there wasiacrowd there, and a band there serenading Gen. Grant and the Secretary of War. Oj. Do you know anything of a man being seen lurking about the premises? A. No sir, it was eleven O'clock before T got there: bis inquiry Was simply where the Secretary of 'War was; I pointed him out to him, but he did not go to see him, nor did he tell what his message was. Cross-examined by Mr. Cox-Q. Was that the first time you saw this man? A: Yes. Q. Have you never seen Mm since* A. Yes, on the Montavfc. as a prisoner. ?J^* .H°wJ°hS>fter was that? A. T don't remember the date, but Itwas the flay they took Booth's body away from thevcssel Q. Was it dark or light? A. Not very dark. Ci. Moonlight? A. No sir, dark., , . Q How was he dressed? A. in black 8" wl|u,tkjndofhathadhe? A. A slouched hat. <4. Didhehavea wholesujtof black* A Yessir Q. What kind of a coat? A. A dress coat. Q. W:is his vest black? A. Yessir. Q-W here docs the Secretary live? A. On the corner ot Fourteenth and K: the second house from the cor ner ot Fourteenth. Q. Wh»t peculiarity about the man enabled vou to identify him? A,. The hall was well lit up, and I was directly in trontofhim. ^ Q. How f;>.r inside the door were you? A. About ten feet, next to thelibrary door. .Q. What do you suppose his size was, standing In the hall? A. About my height; four feet five, or five feet four I should say. Q. When you saw him on the monitor was bestandf mgor sitting? A. He stood up; I had au indistinct view of linn on the monitor, it was so dark. Q.You at first thought ho was intoxicated, and then that he was not? A. Yessir. Q. There were a, good many people in front of the door. A. Yes sir. \ Q. Was there any qne else about the ball? A. No sir. <«J. Who was on the doorstep? A. The Secretary and another gentleman were on the door-step. Q. He had gut behind them? A. Yes sir. Q. Was General Grant in the parlor? A. Yes sir. Q. Was that lit up? A Yessir. Q. Did hehave tlje same beard asbehas now? A. I see no change except from tbe want of shaving. Testimony of Mr. I>. C. Read. Q. State whether you wereacqnainted with Mr. John N. Surratt, in this city. A. I had no personal acquain tance with him. Oj. D*> you know him when you see him? A. Yes sir. Q. When did you last see Mm? A. On the 14th of April, the night of theassassination. Q. In this city? A. Yessir. Q. Where did you see him then ? A. He was standV log on the street below the National, when he passed ; it was about 2'^ o'clock. Q. Was lie alone?' A. Yessir. Q. Doyou remember how he was dressed? A. Yes sir; in. a country cloth suit, varied in texture and ap pearance: it was genteeiy got up; he had a round crowned hat: I noticed his spurs as he passed me par ticularly; he had on a pair of new brass-plated spursj with a very large rowel. • Q. He was on foot was he? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you say was the color of his clothes. A. They were drab. Q. Did you speak to him? A. I bowed to him as he passed. Q. You stated you knew him quite awhile? A. I knew him when a child: lie had thrown pretty much out of my recollection; still I knew him when I saw, him. Q. You have no doubt you saw him on that day? A, I am vei y positive I saw him. Cross-examination by Mr. Aiken.— Q. How long have you known Surratt? Ai I could not state positively the length of time. Q. Have you been in the habit of seeinghim fre quently during the past year? A. I cannot say that I have. Q,. When did you see Mm ? A. I could not say posi tively: I think I saw him sometime last fall, I think, m October. Q. Describe his appearance? A. He was a light-com plected man; his hair was rather singular like; ft is not red nor burned, but rather sandy; it was cut round bo as to lay it low down on his collar. Q." Bkl he wear any whiskers when you last saw him? A. I don't recollect seeing any hair on his face at all: if he had any, itwas very light. Q, Did you see anything of a goatee or moustache on him? A. No; T did notnotico his face so much; I was more' attracted by the clothes lie had on. Q. What do you mean by drab Or grey clothes? A. I mean regular country cloth. Q. Do I understand you to say you were standing on the steps ofthe National Hotel? A. No, as it was tyrd doors below. Q. You had no talk with him? A. No sir. Q. Can you swear positively it was Surratt? A. I may be mistaken, but I am as certain it was he as th&f I am standing here- ^ Jn . ' Q. What is the state of his forehead? A. I could not say. He had his hat- on. My attention was attracted to his clothes and spurs. '.,¦„. Q. You Observed the clothes and the rowel more than his face? A. Ioa'n't say my attention dwelt upon Ms face at all. .*.***¦¦ x.* %. » -u*m Q. How large a man is he; I dont mean his height ? A. He is pot a stout man, but rather delicate: he would 36 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. not weigh over one hundred and forty pounds: he walks a little stooped. Q. How Ion? did you have your eyes upon him ? A. I saw him as he passed, and 1 turned and looked. Q.Didyouseehirna^ain during the clav ? A. Nosir. By Judge Holt.— Q. D;d Surratt recognize you? A. He bowed to me as he passed. -, Q. You say you gave a particular attention to his clothing. Are yon in the habit of judging of these things? 'A. Yes, sir: I makethern myself. Testimony of .Fames W. Pomepbrey. Q. You reside in Washington? A. I do. Q. What is yuur business? A. I keep a livery stable, Q. Arc you acquainted with Booth? A. I was sir. Ci. Do you remember to have seen Mm , on Friday, April HlIi? A. Yes sir; he came to my stable about twelve o'clock and again at four o'clock; he said he wanted a horse at four o'clock cm that day; lie wanted a sorrej that Loused to ride, but I could not let him have it, and I gave him a bay mare about thirteen or fourteen hands high. Q. Was it returned to you? A. I have never seen her since. Q. Describe the mare. A. She was a small mare; a little rub'ced behind; she was a blood-bay, black tall, with a little star on her forehead. , , Q. Was he in the habit of hiring horses from you? A. Yes; he first cam'e in company with Surratt; he asked mo if I was tbe proprietor, and I said yes; he wanted a horse; says I, -'you will either have to give me reference or security; I don't know you; .well," says he, "you have read about me;" "well," Says I, "Who are you, if I have read about you?" He said he was John Wilkes Booth; ,'Isaid I didn'tknaw whether hewas John WilkesJSooth, and Surratt spoke up and said, ''this is John Wilkes Booth," and I let hjm nave the horse. * Q~ Howlong was this before the assassinatiqn? A. One- month ol* six weeks. Q,. Look at that photograph, do you recognize it? A. That is the mau, sir. Q. Did he ask for anything else? A. Only a tie-rein* I told him not to hitch her by the bridle, but to get a boy to hold her if he should happen tostop; he said he was going to Gro-ver's Tneatre to write a letter, and he would put her in a stable back of that; I told him if he •ould'nt get a boy. he could get a bootblack; be said he was going to take a pleasure ride, and asked "How is ChrysLal Springs?" I told him it was a good'place, but rather airy to go to. ; , Q. That was between four and five o'clock. A Yes I have ne^er seenBooth since. Q. Do ypu know any of the other prisoners? A No* I don t know any of them at all. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— Q. Was Surratt with Booth? A. Yes. sir. the first time I saw him; henever came with anybody else. Q. When was that ? A., Six weeks before the assas sination. \ Q. He was not with him on the Friday? A No- Booth wa3 always alone alter that. Q. Whatkindcfa looking man wasSurratt? A He was about five feet, ten or eleven inches; had sandy hair and a light goatee ; his eyes were sunken ; he was thin in feature. , - Q. How w^as he dressed ? A. He had on a grey shirt. I think; I am not certain. , s c' MJil,,» Q. All the remarks he made was that one in refer ence to Booth ? A. That was all, sir. CJ. Did Booth ever refer to his Introduction bv Sur ratt? A. Not at all, sir. Testimony of Rufns Stables. Kufus Stables sworn.— Q. Do you live in Washine- tpncity? A. Yessir. s Q. What is your business ? A. I keep livery stable Q. State whether you were acquainted with Booth;? Q. Also with Surratt? A. Yessir. U Also- with Atzeroth ? A. Yes sir frequ?ntly°U S&e them tDgether at y°ur scaDle ? A. Yes, oi^D^ot'ipTn!11111011^7 A> DQWn t0 ab0»^he 21st Q. March you mean? A. Yes sir, March. Q. Were they unusually intimate? A. Thev would C°o ^f&F&Pt or loaT tirae3 a dafsoSmes Q. Did they keep horses there? A. Surratt kdni twn ,„U. Bidhe allow Atzeroth to usl Ms horses? A No sir, horpde out occasionally with Mm Ci. Did you ever see this note, "Mr Howard win theetemo.18 MT' Howard? A' ^e is the proprietor of ¦, Q. Doyou know whether under that order h« rorin Surratt's horse? A. Several times; but ai'te -that dSl I think tbe order was rescinded. date Q. Look at that paper, and see If ypu can Identify ir Ifandl W '*• l kaQW this note; " 4me "bro^ ¦ Q. How did the note reach the hands of Howard? A ? 0Var.Pr?Snn-L^tr.- ST&tt' &nd 1 Put Jt OB i™ ? Q. Did you let the horse go, accordingly? A. Yes sir. Q Do you remember what Atzeroth said in regard to Surratt's visit to Bichmond? Did he speak to you MS his having been there, or of any trouble he was in volved in in consequence? A. He told me he had been to Bichmond and coming back got into dihicnlty, and' that the detectives were alter him. . * '«« Q. Do you remember what time that was in April?' A. In the early part. . _, Q. Did Atzeroth himself hire horses of you? A. No sir. I think not at that stable. ¦ ,_,. . 1 Q. Did he, or did he not take away a horse blind ot an eye? A. Yes; under the owner's orders. Q. Who was tho owner? A. Surratt. Q. When did he take that, horse away? A. On the 31st; it was paid for on the 29th. Q. Describe the animals taken ? A. They were both bay: one was darker than the other; the one that was blind of one eye was the smaller horse. ,; Q. Were you paid for keeping, them? A. Yes; Booth paid their keep. Q. Did you see the horse afterwards? A; Yes; at tha stable: he took him there to sell him to Mr. Howard. Q. Who. Atzeroth? A. Yes; and he wok him away;' Q. Who claimed the horses? A. Surratt; Surratt claimed them, Booth paid i or their keep.ng. and- Atze roth took them away: there was another gentleman who came and rode with one of them away, v Q. Who was he? A. I don't know. t Q. Do you think you would recognize the horse that wag blind of one eye, if you were to see him? A. Yes sir. The Assistant Judge Advocate then ordered that the witness be taken in an ambulance to see the horse of Nmteenth and I streets ; the Judge Advocate-General remarking that they wished to examine him further when he returned. Testimony of Peter FSatterkelt. Peter Flatterkelt, sworn— B3' Judge Holt— Q,. Please state to the. Court whether you knew J. Wilkes Booth. A. Yes, Q. What is your business? A. I keep a restaurant near Ford's, Theairc. *" Q. State whether or not you saw Booth in vour restaurant 'on' the evening or the 14th of ApriL A Yes; hewas there,justabout ten,,or alittleafter, that night. you recognize his features ? A. Yes ; that is i the man. Q. Which restaurant did the well-dressed man go Into? A. Into the restaurant just below the theatre towards the Avenue. Q. Did ne go in there alone? A. Yes. (J. Iwish you togive.ii you can, a more particular description of this rough looking man; what was his size: wnat gave him the ruffianly appearance you spoke of: was it his dress? A. He was not as well dressed as the rest of them. Q. Was he shabbily or dirtily dressed? A. His clothes were more worn and shabby. ¦ Q. Was he a stout man? A. Yes, rather. Q. Which way did he go? A. He remained at the passage. While the other one started up the street. Q. Tiietimewas aunounedto these other two men, three times, was it? A. Yes s r. Q. Did he immediately go into the theatre after an- nouncingihetimeon thelast occasion? A. Yessir. Q,. Will you 100K atthe persons, an i see wheher you recognize any of them as persons you saw on that occasion? A. If that man ^pointing to Spangler) hud a moustache, he has exactly the appearance of the rou^h looking man standing atthe end ofthe passage. It was racier dark, and I could not see him distinctly; but he had a moustache. * " Q. Y0.1 stale that the last call was made ten minutes after ten. Can you state when the other calls were made? A. They were all made between half past nine and ten minutes past ten. Q. Doyou think you recognize either ofthe other persons here as among the ones you liave mentioned? A. No, the third one was a verjc neat gentleman, well dressed, and with a moustache. Q. You do notseehimhere? No sir; he was better dressed than any one I see here : he wore one of those fashionable hats they were in Washington, with round tops and stiff brims. Q,. Can you describe his dress in color? A. No not exactly. Q. How was he in regard to his size? A. Not very large; about five feet six inches high. ¦ Q. And you have_uever seen that man before or since? A. No, never. ' Q. Doyou remember now the color of his clothes? A. His coat was a kind of a dead color: his hat was black. Q. Did vou observe these men whether any of them, hadsiurson? A. I did not observe that. Examined by Mr. Ewing.—Q. How iongdid you ob serve the slouchyman? A. While I was sitting there until I left; I was there from twenty-five minutes or halt-a'ter nine till the lasttime was called. Q. Was the slouchyman there during the whole of that time? A. He remained at the passage during, the whole of that time. Q. Will you please describe the several articles of dress as nearly as you can? A. I cannot particularly; It was so dark. Q. Could you see his countenance? A. Yes. Q. Could you see the color of his eyes? A. I did not observe that. Q. Did yon^iotice the color of his moustache? A. His moustache was black, Q. Did you observe the color of his hair? A. No. I did not; he remained in one position. Q. Whatkindofahathadhe? A. A slouch hat, that had been worn sometime. Q. Had bean overcoat? A. Idid not pbserve. Q. Did vou notice anything as to the color of his coat ? A'. I did not; I witnessed the well-dressed man whispering to him. Q. Where didhe stand ? A. Bight at the end of the passage on the pavement. Q. Near the President's carriage ? A. No: the Presi dent's carriage was near the curbstone. Q. Did he keep the same position during the whole Qf this time ? A. Yes; the man with the slouch dress did. Q. Which way did Booth enter the "theatre thelast time? A. He jnst stepped into the front door. Q. Did you see the man with the slouch dress stand ing there at that time? A. When Booth whispered to him and left him, I did not see him change his posi tion; I was observing Booth. Q. You do not know whether the man with the slouch dress stood there after Booth weut into the theatre or not? A. I do not. Q. Are you sure be did not go out on the pavement beiore Booth went in? A. I do not recollect his going out on the pavement. Q. What first attracted your attention to that man? A. I observed the. well dressed gentleman speaking toi him. Q. When did you notice that first? A. About twenty- five minutes or hall-past nine. Cj. How long after Booth entered the theatre was it that you heard the news of the assassination? A. I could net tell positively; it might have been fifteen minutes: it may have been less. CJ-.' State what you done in the meantime? A. I started down and went around the corner and into a saloon, debated a while which saloon to go into ; I had only just got in and hadoystera ordered. Q. About how tall doyou think the man with the slouch clothes is? A. He was about five feet eight inches. By the Court.— Q. I understand ydu to say that tha prisoner you have identified (Spangler) was the -man? A. I say that was the countenance with a mbustache; that is the very face. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Have you seen the man since the assassination or'the President beiore now. A. Yes; in the old Capitol Prison. Q. In thepresenceof what persons? A. Ofthe pro1- prietorof the theatre, Sergeant Cooper and another person . Q. Did it seem to you that hewas the man? A. All, but the moustache. Testimony of John M. Buckingham. John M. Buckingham sworn.— By Judge Holt.— Q. In what business were you engaged during the month of April? A. At ni^ht I was door-keeper at Ford's Theatre; during the day I was employed in the Navy Yard. $ Q. Were you acquainted with J. Wilkes Booth dur ing that time ? A. Yes; I knew him by his coming to the theatre. G> stateifyousawhimon the evening of the 14th of April, at what hour and what occurred? A. I judge it was about 10 o'clock. He came into tbe theatre and walked in and out again, and he returned in about two or three minutes. He came to me and asked what time itwas. I told him tostepintothelobbyleadin^intothe -street, and he could see. He stepped out and walked in attliedoor leading to the parquet te; came out im mediately and walked up the &t airway loading to the dress circle; that was the last I saw of him until I saw him leap on thestageand run across tliestav.e with a knifeinhishand: hewas uttering some sentence, but I could not hear what it was so far back. Q. Hewentlnto the President's box did b^? A. The dress circle extends over my door so I could not see. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing- Q. Ave you ac quainted with the prisoner, Edward Spangler? A. Yes, I have known him at the theatre. Q. Did you see him enter and go out at the front en trance during the day? A. No. Q. State your position there, Ls it such that you would be likely to see any person who entered from the front of the theatre? A. Yes.- Every person has to pass me entering the lower part of theatre for the parquette, the dress circle and the orchestra. G> Did you observe ail persons who came in? A. I did not take special notice of them. , I saw that no person came who was not authorized. Q. If this man Spangler had gone in from the street would you have been likely to have seen him? A. Yesjhecouldnothave passed me without my seeing bim. Q. Are you certain that he did not pass? A. lam perfectly satisfi ed ii e did not pass in that nigh t. Q. Did you see him that night at all? A. Not to my recollection. _Q. Didyou ever see "him wear a moustache? A. No sir, not that I can recollect. - James P. Ferguson Sworn. » Bv Judge Holt— Q. State your business. A. The restaurant business, No. 45a Tenth street, adjoining Ford's Theatre on the upperside. Q. Do you know J. Wilkes Booth? A. I do*. Q. Did you see him on the evening or'the assassina tion qf the President? A. I saw him that afternoon; I do not recollect exactly what time i t was; perhaps be tween two and four o'clock; he came up just below mv door in the street; he was sitting on a horse; I walked, out and saw Mr. Maddox standing by the horse, with his hand on the mane; he looked round 38 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. and said to me, " Ferguson/ spe what a nice horse I have; he will run just like a cat;/' with that he stuck his spurs in the horse, and run 013, and I saw no more of him till that night at ten o'clock; along in the after? noon, about one o'clock. I was told that my favorite, ¦ General Grant, Was going to be at the theatre, and if I wanted to pee him I had better- go; I got a seat directly opposite tbe President's box, in the dress circle; I saw the President and bis family when they came in with some gentlemen in citizen's clothes, whom I did not recognise ; I supposed that General Grant had remained outside, intending to come in alone, and not create an excitement in the theatre, and I mado up my mind that I would see him, and I watched every one who passed around that Side ofthe dress circle. Somewhere about ten o'clock I saw Booth pass around in that direction. Some thing attracted my attention towards the stage. I then saw him push open the door leading to the boxes. I did not see anything more of him until I saw hhh rush to the front of the1 box, and jump over, and as he jumped I could see the kni'e gleaming in his hands; at thattimethe President was sitting, leaning on his hands, towards tbe right, looking down on some person in the orohastra; he was not looking : on the stage; ho was looking between the post and tbe flag decorating the box; as he jumped over I saw it was Booth; I saw the fia-h of the pistol right in the box, and heard him exclaim Sic Semper Tyran nise he ran right across the stage to the door; where the actors come in, and I saw no more of him Iran as quickly as I could to the Police office, on Tenth street, and told the Superintendent; I then ran up Tenth street, lor the fkurpose of seeing General Augur, or, Colonol Wells; Colonel Wells was standing on the steps; I told him I had seen it all; 'he told the guard to pass me in, and I went in and told him the story; I went home and wont to bed; the next morn ing I got up andMr.Giffordsaid to me itwas a hell of a statement I had made last night, aboutseeing the flash ofthe pistol in the 'box, when the pi3f-ol was fired out side oi the door; I told Mm ii was firsd inside the door, and afterwards went rouud to the theatre 10 examine Me hole where^the ball 'Was supposed tohavegone th rou/;h tbe door; the hole was evidently bored with a large gimlet and whittled wiph $ knife; the scratches ofthe knife could plainly be seen. Q. Is Mr. Gifford the other carpenter? A, Yes; he had charge ofthe theatre altogether : he was theehief carpenter and had full charge there, as I always un derstood. Q.( Was tbe President's box on the south side of the. theatre? A. Yes;' he always had the same box, every time I' saw him there. Q. Did you hear any other expression except '• Si® Semper Tyrannis?"" A. I heard someone call out of the box, I do not know who, but I suppose it must have been Booth. '•Bevengof'ortheSoutn!" just as he jumped; as he went over on to the stag^e I saw the Pre sident raise his head, and saw Mrs. Lincoln catch him by the arm ; then I understood Mr. Lincoln had been shot ; by that time Booth was across the stage. Q. Did Booth's spur catch into the flag? A. His spur caught by the flag." Itwas the blue part of the Ame rican flag. As he went over his spur caught the mould ing on the edge ofthe box, and also the flag. It tore a piece -of the blueoff, and carried it half acros the stage. Thespur was on his right heel. ' Q. Did you observe the hole in the door only enough to see whether it had been freshly out out? A. No, suf; not particularly; jailor noticed a hole out in the wall, looKinp as i." done by a knife to admit the end of a bap of wood, with which he had fastened the door. Q. Couldyou observe tbespurata.ll, as to thecbarac- ter ot it? A. No, I could not observe that; I noticed it particularly, because it caught In the flag as he went dVer the boxes. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q. Did you see the bar with which the door was fastened. A. I did not; we could not find it the next day. CJ. Did you know spangler; the prisoner? A. Yes. Cj, Did you see him on that night? A. I do not recollect seeing him. I was In the theatre that night. I went in about twenty minutes of eight o'clock. I wanted to got there be 'ore this party came in. Q,: Do you know him well? A. Yes; he worked in the Theatre. Q. Did you ever see him wear a moustache? A. I d -j not think I ever did: I do not think he ever wore a moustaohe sidce I have been there. THE PEEVATE TESTIMONY. 'If Important 4ft idence of nn QfUcer of Glen. Johnston's Stan". - The testimony taken before the doors wexe.opeped to reporters lor the press includes that of a man who was for several years In the military service of the sp-caljed OqraLederate States, employed in the topographical de partment, on the staff of General Edward Johnston. He was in Virginia in the summer of 1863, twenty miles from Staunton, He became acquainted with three citizens of Mary land, one of whom was Bopth and the, other, named I Shepherd, He was asked by Booth and his com- 1 panions what he thought of the probable success of thu Confederacy, and be told them that after such a chas£ as the Behels had then got from Gettysburg, he be-. lieved it looked rather gloomy. Booth told him that was nonsense, and added: "If we only act our part right the Confederacy will gain its independence, and old Abe Lincoln must go up the spoilt.* The witness understood by the express Bfon "must go up the spout" that it meanthemustbe killed. Booth said that as soon as the Confederacy was nearly whipped, that was' the' final resource to gain the independence ofthe Confederacy Tbe companions of Booth assented to his sentiments; the witness was at the camp of the Second Virginia Begiment, and there was a second meeting of Bebel officers on that occasion. He was not present at tha meeting, but one of the officers who was, stated ita purport; he believed that Booth was at that meeting! The purpose was to send certain ofheers^n detache'd'' service to Canada and the borders to deliver prisoners, to lay the "Northern cities In ashes, and finally to get after the members of the Cabinet and kill the Presi dent. The nameof the officer who gave him the in? formation was Lieutenant Cockerill. Booth was associating with all the officers. He heard very often that the assassination of the Presi dent was an object finally to bje accomplished. He had heard it freely spoken of in the streets of Richmond. This necessity was,geherally assented to in the servieej A lady from New York testified to having met Booth arid a man named" Johnson, and overheard their conversation. She picked up two letters which they had dropped, and' one of them was addressed " Dear Davis," saying, that the "lot had fallen upon him" to be the Charlotte Corday of the nineteenth century. Abe must drink the cup: you can choose your own weapons, the knife, the bullet, &c. The letter is signed Chas. Selby. Two other witnesses testified that they were in Cana da, and saw Booth in conversation with George San ders, and believed they also saw Bo.oth talking with Clay, Halcomb and Thompson. 9 Testimony of Captain Tlieo. MeGovern. By Judge Advocate Holt— Q. Did you know J. Wilkes Booth? A. I knew him by sight. Q. Did you see him the night of the assassihation of the President? A. Yes. Q. Describe what you saw on that occasion. A'. X was sitting on a chair in tne little aisle by the wall leading towards the door of the President's box on the; night of the murder, when a man came who disturbed meinniy seat, causing me to push my seat forward to permit him to pass; he then stepped about two or. three feet from where I was, and stood leisurely tak« ingasurvey of thehouse; I looked at Mm, because he happened to come almost in my line of sight; betook a small pack of visiting cards from/his pocket, andse? lecting one replaced the others; he handed the card to the President's messenger, who was sitting just below; whether tbemessenger took the card into the box. oar after looking allowed him to go in, I do not know, bufc in a moment or two I saw him go into the box and closethe door of the lobby leading to the box. Q. Didyou see him .after the pstol was fired? A. Yes. I saw the body of a man descend from the front of the box to the stage, and he was out of my sight in a moment; in- another moment he re-appeareu, and strodeacross thestage, amdas he passed I saw the gleaming blade of a dagger in his right band. Q. Was.lt a large weapon he held in his hand? A. Yes, the blade I should suppose to be five or six inches, in length, from the length ofthe gleam I saw. Q. Did you see whether it was Booth? A. I know Booth, but I did not recognize him. Testimony of Major SSenry K. Rathbnn. By Judge Holt.— Q. Please state to the Court whether pr not you were iu the box with the President on the night of the, assassination. A. Yes. Q. State, all the circumstances that camo under your observation in connection with that assassination. A. With the permission ofthe Court, I will say that I pre pared a little statement at the time, which I would like tq read in preference of giving the testimony here. It was made when the details were fresh in my mind. Permission having beenglven, witness thereupon read the,statement to the Court. TMshas heretofore been published. Q,. You did not know Beoth yourself? A. No. Q. Could you, recognize him from this photograph? A, X should be unable to recognize him as the man in the box; I myself have seen him on the stage some time since. . By 'the Court— Q. What distance was the assassin from tb,e President when you first saw him? A The distance from' where the President was sitting was four or five feet, to the best of my recollection; this man was standing between him and the door. By Judge Holt— Look at that weapon and see if it is about such a one as appeared to be used by Booth that night. A. I think it might have made a wound simi lar to tbe one I received; I could not recognize the knife; I simply saw the gleam. By'Colbnel Burnett— Q. Bidyou noticehow the blade TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 39 was held in the hand of tbe assassin? A. Yes; the blade was held flat arid horizontal; the entry of the wound would indicate it came with a sweeping blow from above. Testimony Of William Withers. Jr. Examination bv Judge Holt.— Ql Do you belong to the orchestra of Ford's Theatre? A. Yes. Q. Were you there the night of the assassination oi the President? A. Yes. ..Q. Did you see J. Wilkes Booth there that night? A. Yes. , Q. State what you saw. A. I had some business on the stage with the stage manager, in regard to ana tionalsong I had conttposed: I wnrited to see in what costume they were going to sing it; I learned from the manager that they would sing it in th° costiftne they wore at the close of the piece; after that I was return ing under the stage to the orchestra, when I heard the report ol a pistol: I was astonished that a pistol should be fired while playing The American Cousin; I never heard one beiore; just then I met a man running be fore me; I stopped, Completely paralyzed; I did not know what was the matter; he hit me on the leg, turned me round, and made two cuts at me, one on the neck and one on the side; as he went past me I said that is Wilkes Booth; with that he made a rush . for the door, and out he went;- just then I heard the cry that the President was killed, and I saw him in the box, apparently dead, <¦, ,Q. Which way did he go out of the theatre? A. Out of the back door. Cross-examination by Mr. Ewing.— Q. Are you ac quainted with the prisoner, bpungler? A. I have known him ever since I have been in the theatre. Q. Did you see him that night? A. No, sir; I do not recollect seeing him that night; I only happened to go On the stage to see the manager. CJ, Which side of the stage did you go on? A. The right hand side facing the audience, furthest from the President's box. Q. What was the position of this man ? A. His posi tion ought to have been mere when the scene was to be changed right in the csntre of the stage; his busi ness was to change the scenes, and he ought to have been right behind the scenes. Q. On which side? A. I do not know on which side his position was. Q. Do you know whether the passage through which Booth passed out of the-nltoor is generally obstructed? A. Sometimes there are a great many persons there, so that you cannot pass, but that night everything seemed to be deari I met nobody that night until I met Wilkes Booth. Q,. Were they playing a piece requiring much shift ing of the scenes? A. i think atthat*pointof the play itr could not be> many minutes beiore the scene would require to be changed. Q. Was it a time when the passage-way, in the ordi nary course of things, would have been obstructed? A^ Some of the actors might have been there wait ing to go on the next scene. (Witness here described at length the various localities in connection with the stage.) 0> Didyou ever see Spangler wear a moustache? A. No, I have always seen him as he appears now; I do not think I ever saw him with a moustache. l Q. How long have you known Mm? A. Ever since Ford's Theatre has been going, nearly two years. By Judge Holt— Q. is there not aside way by which the theatre can be. entered without passing in from the front? A. No, not as I know ol; there is onelittie passage where the actors and actresses get in, but that is the front way. Q. That is used exclusively by the actors? A. Yes sir, itwas used when the theatre was first opened by actors when they wanted to go out to take a drink Without being observed. By the Court— Q. When you met Booth on the stage as hewas passing out, could you seethe door as he went out? A. Yessir. Q. Was there any doorkeeper standing there5 that youcouidsee? A. I did not see any. ) Q. Was the door open? A. No, I think not. Q. Was there anything to obstruct his passage out? A. No. Q. Was that not an unusual state of things? A. It seemed strange to me; it was unusual. i <&. Was there any 'Check at allatihedoor as he went out? A. No; it seemed to rhe alter he gave me the blow that knocked me down, and in which he came very near going under, he made one plunge and was out., <&. Was it your impression that the door was opened for him, or that he opened it himBelt? A. I don't know; I tried it myself; to see ifitcbuld be opened so easily; it surprised me. . Q. Was it your Impression that Some one assisted him in going out, by opening the door? A I did not Bee anybodv; I only saw him go out. i Cfc Dotbescenesstandatthls-'tiiriejiiBtSsth'ey Were left, or have they been changed? A. I really do not know. Q. Do you say there Is no passage out of the theatre except in front? A. No; you have to go from the alley round and come in front. Re-examination of Stanler. By Judge Holt.— Q. State to the Court whether sines- y£Er e££Mination you have been, to a 'stable In the city and found the horse referred to? A. Yes, I have. * 9" r°$£2 recognize that as the horse yon relefred to? A. Y6s; that is the bay horse that Atzeroth took awayonthe29Lh of March, arid brought back some days afterwards, for sale. By the Court— Q. That was the horse held at your stable ut the Surratt House? A. Yes, until Booth paid the livery and took him away. Q. Where i3 he kept now* A. On the corner of Se venteenth and I streets. Q. Whose stable is it? A. A Government stable, by Mr. Doster. 0,7 Are yob the owner of the place Where these horses werekept? A. No, sir. Q. What w.is your business there? A. The reception of llyery horses, the hiring to parties, and a general oversight. Q. Are yoo certain Surratt. owned* these horses? A. I supposed he did; he brought them there in his name and paid the iivefy. • Q. Didnot you say that somebody else paid the liv ery? A. When they were taken away finally Booth paid it. f Q Didyou not say Surratt paid the livery? A. Sur ratt paid down to the end ofthe month previous. Q. When Booth settled the bill, did he claim the horse as his? A. No. CJ. Did he state who they belonged to at that time? A. He gave the order of Surratt tb pay for the horses and take them away. Q. You say this horse you have just described was sold from your stable? A. No sir; he was not sold; he was brought there on livery, and oh the 29th of March Booth paid the livery for the month ending March 31, audsome days afterwards Atzeroth brought them there to sell. ' » CJ. When did you see this horse last before to-day? A. About the4th or 5th of April, when he was brought there to sell. Q. Have you seen that horse in the possession of At zeroth since tlaat time? A. Not since he brought him there to sell. Testimony of Joe SSainras (Colored.) Examined by the Judeve Advocate.— Q. What con nection have you at Ford's Theatre? A. I have worked there twoyearfc.; I went there when I first came to Washington. ^ Ci. Were you there the night the President was as sassinated? A. I was up atthe fly where they hang up the curtains. Q. Did you see Booth theSe that evening? A. I saw him there between five and.six o'clock. Q. State where you saw him, and what he did? A. When I saw him he came in the back part of the staged be went out and went into a restaurant beside the theatre; I saw himno'triore that night until alter the Eeriofmance commenced; during the performance I eardapirtol tired, and looked immediately to see what it was; Isawhimjump from tbe private box on to the stage and make his escape across the stage; I saw no more of Mm. GJ. Who was with him when he went out In the after noon? A. There Was no one; Mr. Spangler was standing out in front, and he invited him in to take a drink. Q. Is this the man here, pointing to Spangler?' A. Yes. that is the man. C&. Did you hear anything said between . them? A. NO; they went hi to take a drink; that is all I heard. Q. Did youeee Booth when he came up back ofthe theatre with his horse? A. No; the qther colored man who works with mesaw him. Q. Didyou know Spangler very well? A. Yes. CJ. Were lie and Booth very intimate? A. They were quite intimate.. Qj You saw them gbahd drink together? A. Yesj that is all. v_ Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q. Had Spangler anything to do with Booth's hordes? A. Nothing more than that he would hive them attended to when Booth was aWay. p Q. He Saw to their being fed and watered, didn't he ? A. Yes. CJ. Was he hired by Booth? A. No, riot Spangler; the other young man Booth hired, but I suppose Boot!| thought he would not do justice by his horse and got Spangler to see Id It, whfc>n hS was not there. Q. what position did Spangler hold in thetheatre> A. Hewasone of thestage managers: beshifted scenery at night'anu worked on the stage during the day. Q. Whatwashis position on •thestageat night? A; On the right hand of thestage as you face the audience! CJ. Thai was the side Of the Presidem'sbox, was it nqt? A No; the President's box was oh the left band sideof fch.6 stage, as you look out opposite Spangier's place. Q. Where was your position? A; Mypdsitionwasup in the flyers where they wind the curtain up on the thirdfetory. , , (J. B\dyou see Spangler that night after five o'clock* A. Oh, yes; he was there on the stage attending to his business as usual. 40 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. , Q. What time did you see htm? A. Itwas in the early ,4?a,rt of the evening: I never inquired the. time; we had no time up where we were. CJ. How long did you. gee him before the President .was shot? A. I did not see him at ail before the.Presi- dent was shot: I was looking at the performance until I heard the report of a pistol. Q. Did you see him during the play that night? A. Yes: he was obliged to be there. Q. Did you see him in the first act? A. Yes. Q. Did you see him in the second act? A. I do not remember seeing him in the second. Q. Could you have seen him where you were up in .the fly? A. Yes, sir: I could see him from my side over on ;,he other side of the stage. Q. Was Spangler's place on the opposite side? A. Yes sir. on the opposite side below. ' Q. Were you looking for him during the second act? ,A. No. CJ. Was beasort of assistant stage manager? A. He was a regular stage manager to shitt the scenes at night. Q. From where you were could you see the Presi dent's box? A. I could, plain, Q. What time in the first act did you see Spangler? A. In the first act I saw him walking about the stage looking at the performance. Q. Hadhebishaton? A. No. CJ. How was hedressed? A. I could not tell exactly what kind of clothes he had on. Q. Did he look just as he does now as to his face? A. Yes, just as natural as he does now. CJ. Did you ever see him wear a moustache? A. No. Q. From where you were on the fly would not the scenes change so that sometimes you could' not see him? A. bometim.es I could only see nim occasionally. Testimony of John Miles (Colored.) Examined by Judge Advocate Holt.— Q, State whether you belong to Ford's Theatre. A. I do. ; Q. Were you there on the night of the assassination of the President? A. Yes. Q. Did you see J. Wilkes Booth there? A. Yes; I saw him when he came there. <* ' CJ. Tell the Court all about what you saw? A. He came there about nine or ten o'clock: he brought a horse up from the stable down there to "the back door, and called to iVect Spangler to come out from the theatre three times; then Spangler came .across, the Stage to him; after that I did not see what .became ot Booth any more till I heard the uistol go off; then I went up in sight of the President's!; box: I heard some man say he believed somebody had shot tliePresideut; when I got there the President had gone out, or I could not see him; I went in a moment to the, window and heard the horses' ieetgoing ont ofthe alley. CJ. Did you see any one holding the horse? A. Yes, J saw the boy after he-had called for Ned Spangler. Q. You do not know what was said between them ? A. No ; I only heardhim call for Ned Spangler. , CJ. You say he came up to the door with his horse, between 9 and 10 o'clock. Do you know where he kept •his horse? A. Yes, in a little stable close bv there: I saw him come from there about 3 o'clock witli Ned Spangler and Josevh Maddox. CJ. How lar is the little stable where he kept his •horse lrom the theatre? A I do not think it is more than fifty yards. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q. Was the play going on when Booth rode up and called for Spangler? A- Yes: they were just closing a scene, and getting ready lo take off that scene; Spangler was pushing the scene across the stage when Booth called to him three times. CJ. Where were you? A. I was up on the fly, three stories and a halt from the stage. CJ. In what act was that ? A. I think in the third act. CJ. How long before the President was shot? A. The President came in in the first act; I think It was in the third act he was shot ; lrom the time he brought the horse there until he was shot I think was about three- quarters of an hour. Q. Do you know who held the horse ? A. John Pea nut held the horse from the time Bootli he:d him until he went away; every time I saw hiin, John was hold ing the horse. _ §, Was John Peanut there when Booth came up? A. I did not see him there ; there was no one there when Booth came up. CJ. Do yoa know whether Spangler went out of the door when Bioth called himv, A. He ran across the stage: I d.d uotseeihemgoout. CJ. How long did Spangler stay there ? A. I do not mow; the next time I, looked this boy was holdintr the horse. 6 Q. How long was this after he called Spangler ? A Perhaps tenor fifteen minutes. Q. JJo you know what Spangler had to do with TBooth? A. No; he appeared to be familiar with him. 43. Did Booth treat him ? A. I never saw him treat bim. CJ. Did Spangler have anything to do with Booth's horses? A. I have seen him hold them up at the stables. CJ. Did yon know anything about, his hitching the horses or holding them up? A. No, sir: I never Baw him. hitch them, up to tue buggy; .Tohn Peanut always did -that, , Q. Do you know what place Slangier occupied on the stage? A. On the right handPide, next.toE street; oh the'side the President's bpx \vas. CJ. Could' you see him from where you were, three stories above? A. Yes: I could see right straight through the scenes on that side of the stage: I always saw him at work en that side. CJ. -Was heon that side when Booth called him? A. Yes. ) CJ. What was Spangler's business there? A. To shift the scenes at night across the stage. Q. Was there another man shifting them from the other side? A.' Yes, there was a man opposite to him. " Q. Did you see Spangler after Peanut John held Booth's horse? A. 1 never saw him any more until I came down after the President was shot; Spangler was then outside of the same door Booth went out at. CJ. Were the others out there? A. Yes. there .were some more men out there; I did not notice who they were. % Q. Men of the theatre? A. Yes; men who were at the theatre that night: there were strangers there too. Ci. How many men were out at the back door at that time? A. Not more than three or four when I came down: I came down in a very short time alter I un derstood what it was; I asked Spangler who it was that held the borsel be told me not to say anything; I knew it was the same person who brought the hoise there that rode him away. CJ. Could you see Spangler all the time that he was on the stage? A. When he was working; in that time leouldseehim. Q. Did you look at him that night? A. I'did not no tice himparticularly that night anv more than I usual ly did: I would not have noticed him had not Booth called him. CJ. You. do not know whether he was on that night or not? A'. He was when Isaw him; CJ. What was it you asked Spangler when yon came down? A. I asked him who it was holding the horse at the door: he told me to hush, and not say anything at art to him; and I never said any more to him Q. Was he excited? A. He appeared to be. CJ. Was every person excited? A. Everybody an- pearedvery much excited. CJ. Did yuu not say he replied to vou hush, ard not say anything to him? A. I should have said he told me not to say anything about it. Q. Do yon know Spangler well? A. I know him when I see him. CJ. Did yoir"ever see him wear a moustache? A No B1Ji t^ hot thiak I ever saw him wear a moustache. By Judge Holt— CJ. This remark which he made to you, • tai/i, do not say anything about it," was imme diately after the killing of the President, wasn't it' A. Yes, right at the door, as I went out. CJ. Did he make auy further remarks as a reason Why you should not say anything to him? A. No not a word to me. Q. Did you see Booth go out of the door? A No- 1 heard the horse go out of thealley; which way he went. right or lelt, I cannot tell; I heard the rattling of his leet on the rocks in the alley. Q. Was the door left open at that time when Booth had gone out? A. It was open when I went down; whether it was open from the time he went out I ,"o not know; 1 had come down three stories beiore reach ing the door. CJ. Do you know of anybody who probably beard your remark tospangler. and his reply? A. No sir- 1 doiiot know that any person was noticing it at all- there were a good many persons round by the court ¦ CJ. When Booth called to Spangler, the first time did you see where he was? A. No, when he called' the hrst time I did not notice where he w,,s; when he ca:led the second and third times I noticed where he was standing. CJ. *V'nere did he go? A. He went towards the door and got underneath the fiy.so that I could not see him any more until I loo ked out of the window CJ. How long was he with Booth? , A. I could'nt tell Ineversaw him anymore until r came downstairs CJ. When Spangler told yon to hush and not sav any thing about it, was he near tbe door? A He was T suppose, a yard and a half lrom the door " ""»• ± Q. Wai anybody .else near the door?', A. Notas I know of; -there was nobody between him and me and the door. - CJ. Did he have bold of the door at the time' A No he was walking across in front of the door A NoY" anyb0'ly else be^een him and the door? Q. Was itlight or dark? A. Itwas right dark- itwas adark night any way, and there wa?no light right - Cross-eatamtned by Mr, Ewing.-Q. Wer» vou and s?fI,^iri™-dotl«doororo'.usioei A. Outside a&tSS5Win,^,,i2r iP<¥Ple wli° ™> *ay were aluxLfm-th.rr;,,™ .nw,dl5s '-"v* around; some of them Sii „„,,., j frc?1 the door; I was between these dbo- ple and the door; they were in the alley p TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT- WASHINGTON. 41 By the Court.— Q.iDid they appear to be guarding I that door? A. ISO. Q. Did he act as if he was trying to prevent persons from geti -ns: in and out of the door? A. No; he ap peared to be verv mu:h excited; that was all Inoticed; at that time Booth had gone out ofthe alley. Testimony of John Selectman. By Judge Holt.— Q. Are you connected with Ford's Theatre? A. 1 am. , Q. Were you present on the night of the President's assassination? A. 1 was. Q. Did you know J. Wilkes Booth? A. Yes. Q. Did you or did you not see him on that night; if so. at what hour, and under what circumstauces ? A. I saw him about nine o'clock; he came up on a horse to the back door of the theatre; Spangler was standing there, and Booth said, "Kelp me all you can, won't you? he replied, ''Oh, yes." Q. Did lie" say that as lie came up to the door on his horse ? A. Yes, when he came up on his horse. Q. Was that the first remark he made? A. The first words I heard him say were : " Ned, help me all you can, won't you?" Q. How long was that before the President was shot? A. About an hour and a hall', I should judge. Q. Did you observe the horse afterwards ? A. No, I did not. Q. You did not see Booth in front ? A. I just caught a glimpse ot him as he was goiug out of the hrst en trance, right hand side. Q. What hour did you see him going out at that en trance? A. It was halt-past ten, I judge, alter he shot the President, Q. Do you mean tnat he went out of the back door ? A. Yes. ¦ Cross-examined byMr.Ewing— Q. Did your hear him calling Spangler? A. .No; the first I heard him say was "Help me all you can." Q. Where was that? A. Out of the back door. Q. Did you s?e Booth ride up? A. No sir; the horse was standing there. Q. Was anybody holding the horse then? A. I didn't see anybody at all. Q. Djd you see the horse? A. Yes; I could not see Whether anybody held him, or not, it was so dark. Q. What is your place iu the theatre? A. Assistant property man. Q. What is your position on the stage? A. We have to set the furniture and all such work as that, on the stage. ¦ Q. What was Spangler's position on the stage? A. Stage carpenter. Q. Was he -the principal carpenter? A. Np. Gifford was the principal carpenter; Spangler was hired by Gifford. " Q. What was his duty during the performance? A, To shilt the scenes. Q. On which side was his position? A. I do not know. Q. Were you about that night? A. Yes. Q. Were you on the stage during the whole day? A. Except that I went down to the apothecary's store once, and I believe I was before that in a restaurant next door. Q. Didyou notice the, employees so tnat you could say whether Spangler was there through tbe play? A. No, I cnuld not; I saw him after the assassination; he was standing on the stage; he had a white handker chief in his hand, and appeared to be wiping his eyes. Q. Was berrying? A. Idonotknow. Q. How long was that after the President was shot? A. About ten minutes. Q. Did not Spangler frequently have Booth's horses? A. I didn't see him at all. Q. Was Booth a habitue at the theatre? Did he go back and forth (requently? A. Yes. Q. Was he familiar with the actors and employees? A. I think' he was. Q. Knew them all pretty intimately? A. Yes. Q. Did he not have access to the theatre at all times? A. Yes. Q. And went behind the scenra in the green-room ? A. Yes, anywhere at all about the theatre. Q. Is Spangler a drinking man ? A. 1 thinkJie Is. Q. Did Booth treat him much ? A. I don't khbw. Q. Were you round In front of the theatre at any time during the performance? A. Yes, I was on the pavement in front. Q. Did you see anything of Spangler In front? A, No. Q. At what time were you there? A. I was there from about, or half-past 7 o'clock, until after the as-sas- aimation. Q. Did you know the people who were about there ? A. No. Q. If Spangler had been there would you probably have noticed him ? A. I guess I would. Q. Did you notice the President's' carriage there ! A. Yes. Q. Did you ever see Spangler wear a moustache? A. 3fJo, I don't think I ever did; I have seen him wear aide whiskers. Q. How was his face at that time? A. I think he was smooth shaved. Q. You, say you were in front of the theatre con stantly? A. Oh no; not constantly., Q. But frequently? A, No sir; I got to the theatre about half-past seven or eight o'clock, and was about the theatre until after the assassination; I was in front two or three times. Q. Were,you there during the third act? A. No; I was on the stage during the third act. Ci. Were you in, front during the second act? A. I think I was in the restaurant next door. Q. How long before tne close of the second act? A. About ten or fifteen minutes. Q, And you think if Spangler had been there you would have seen him? A. Yes. By the Court.— Q. How did you get from the rear to the iront of the theatre? A, There is aside entrance irom the a1 ley. Q. You did not go, then, through the front door ? A. No, Q. Did you see Booth in front of the theatre ? A, I saw him that aitemoon between 4 and 5 o'clock in a restaurant next, door; he with several others were there drinking; I saw Ned Spaugler, Maddox, Booth, Peanuts, and a young gentleman by the name of Mai den, were there; Macldox asked me if I would not take a drink; I said yes, ftnd went up and took a glass of ale. Q. You did not see Booth out on the pavement when you were out on the pavement that night? A. Not after he rode up that alternoon. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q. How far were you from Booth and Spangler when Booth made the remark you have stated? A. About as far as from here to you; about ten feet. Q.. How far was Spangler from him? A. About as far as this gentleman here is from you; about two or three feet. Q. Then Booth spoke in aloud voice? A. Yes. Q. Did Booth see you? A. 1 don't know; he went right behind the scenes. Q. Could he have seen you from where he was standing? A. Oh yes. , Q. Was there anybody by except you? A. I didn't notice at that time. Q. Was not Spangler in liquor that night? A. That I cannot say. Q. Did you often see him drunk or in liquor? A. I could not tell whether he was drunk or not. Q. Was not he habitually pretty well soaked? A. I do not know, indeed. By the Court.— Q. Was there anything unusual in the arrangement of tnefurniture that night on the stage ? A. Yes sir. , Q. Was it all in its proper place according to the per formance going on? A. Yes. Q,. The scenes and everything ? A. Yes. , By Judge Holt.— Q. Do you know whether the scenes remain now about as they were that night? A.I do. not know; I have not been in the theatre but once or twice since the assassination. Q, Do you know 'what Spangler had to do with the decoration or arrangement of the President's box ? A, No sir, I do hot. The Judge Advocate-General remarked that to enas ble the Court to understand perfectly the testimony of witnesses relative to the occurrences in the theatre, it would be proper for them to visitttne theatre, and obr serve for themselves the different localities. Itwas therefore determined that the members of the Court meet informally at Ford's theatre, on Tenth street, to day, at hall-past nine o'clock A. M. The Court ad journed formally until ten this morning. SUPPJBESSE1* TESTIMONY OF FRIDAY Henry Van Steinackei-, A witness for the prosecution, being sworn, deposed as iollows:— „ ' By Judge Advocate Holt.— Q. Have you or not for several years been in the military service of the so- called Confederate States? A. Yes sir, I have been. , Q. In what capacity? A. IwasemployedintheTopo graphical Department, ranking as engineer officer, with the pay of an engineer officer; Q. On whose staff ? A. Thestaffof General Edward Johnson. Q. Were you or not In the, State of 'Virginia in the; summer oi'1863,andat what point? A. When wecame; back from Pennsylvania, alter the battle of Gettysburg, I was ordered with another engineer lieutenant. Who was very sick, to convey him to his home at Staunton. in the Valley of Virginia; and from there I took my way back to find the army again; and near Harrison-, burg, twenty-five miles from Staunton, at SwiitRun Gap, I was overtaken by three citizens, with whom I, got better acquainted, alter having ridden a while with' them; and I found them out to belong to Maryland; the. name of one was Booth, and the other one's name was. Sbepht-rd. Q. Do you remember the features of Booth? A. I do not romemher the features of all of them. ' ' Q. Look at that photograph (handing to the witness a photograph of J. Wilkes Booth). A. There is a r*> semblance, but the face wasfuller. Oj. You think it is the same person, but he had & fuller face than this? A. I believe it is. 42 TRIAL OP THE ASSASSIN'S AT": WASHINGTON. Q. Did you learn at that time thatffewas John Wilkes Booth, the actor? A. I heard the other -gentlemen call him Booth; I thought first it was a nickname-, but after wards I found out that itwas Booth? , Q. How far did you rrde-Wlth those persons? A. We stayed at the tavern at the foot of the mountain until fchehextday; there I gotbetter acquainted with them. Q. How long were you together; how many hours do yhusuppose? A. Eighteen or twenty hours. Q. Didyou have any free conversations in regard td public affairs while you were with him? A. Yes sir. Q. Will you state what Booth said to you in regard to.any contemplated purppse of attack upon the Pre sident of the United States; State all that be said? A.' I was asked by Booth and by those others, too, what I thought of the probable success of the Confederacy, and I told them that after such a chase as we had then got from Gettysburg I believed' St looked rathfer gloomy, and then Booth told me. "that is nonsense; If we only act our part right the 'Confederacy will gain their independence; old Abe ZMcoin must go up the apout, and the Confederacy .will guin tlietr tyi&ependence anyhow;" that was the expression at the time. Q. What did you understand by the expression, he "must go up the spout," from all that Booth Said? A. Itwas a common expression, meaning he must be killed; that I understood always. . . requested by the parties who came to tho hotel. Q. Have you taken from the books memoranda to enable you to state as to his subsequent arrivals and departures drrmg the. following months? A. They are all containea in this memorandum from November Ub. (J. When was his next return after leaving on No vember 16th ? A, They are alt included in this memo randum from November 9, 1864, to A uril 8, 18C5. Q. That paper, then, as you ho'.d it in your hand, you state to be an accurate transcript from the books ? A. Yes sir, from ourbooksattho hotel. Q. Do you know who were his associates in the hotel generally when he was there— his room-mates ? A. His most intimate friends? one was John McCullough, an actor. Q. Was he his, room mate? A. He roomed with him a portion of the time. Q. Could y^u name any other of bis room mates dur ing that time? A.John P. Went worth, of California; lie also roomed with Mr. Mc Anile, agent of Edwin Forrest, whne he was rooming with Mr. McCullough; the three occupied thesameroom. Q. That memorandum which you have brings him down to the 8th of April, you say? A. Yes sir. Q. Did he leave on that day? A. That was his last arrival at the hotel. Q. He remained there until the assassination of the President? A. Yessir. Q. Had he a room there at the time the President was assassinated? A. He ban. Q.. Were you present when his trunk was opened by the officers? A. I was not; I packed his baggage the next day and had it removed to our baggage-room. Q. Do you know John H. Surratt, of this city? A. I do not by name : Booth had a great many callers that I knew by sight, but did not know their names. 0> Have vou seen any of these prisoners before? A. I know this* small one with black whiske-s and impe rial ; I do uot know his name, but know him by sight. [Pointing to Michael O'Laughlin.] Q. Did you see him at the hotel ? A. Very often ; he frequently called on Booth. , Q. Look at all tbe rest, and see if you recollect any of the others? A. No sir, [aiter looking at the various accused.] Q. You sav he called frequently. Would he remain with Booth in his room ; d.d he remain at nlgbt-at any time? A. We were sO busy during the winter that I never paid much attention to these things. Q. Do vou know how long these calls were con- tinned; whether they were up to the last moment of Booth's stav? A. I do hot think I saw him the last few davs of Booth's remaining there; I do not recol lect that he called then. No cross-examination. ,, , , The Judge Advocate oifered in evidence, without ob jection, tbe following portions of the memorandum spoken ofby'thewitness Bunker:— J. Wilkes Booth was not at the National Hotel during the month oi October, 1864. He arrived there November 9; occupied room 20; left on early train morning of nth. , Arrived acram November Mth, and left on the 16th. His next arrival was December 12th; leit December 17th, morning train. „„_.,, Arrived again December 22d; left 24th, H-lo A. M. Arrived again Decembei 3ist; left January 10th, 1865, ' Arrived again January 12th; left28th, 7'30 P. M. train; occupied ro. m ooja. M, Arrived again February 22d; occupied room 231, in companv with John P. II. Wentworth and John McCullough Wentworth went 'into this room at the susee^tion of Mr. Merrick, clerk, as they wereshortof room* Booth left February 18, 8*15 A. M. train, closing his account to date, inclusive. His name does not appear on the register, but anothenoom Is assigned 44 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. him, and his account commences March 1st, without any entry upon the regtster of that date; 2d, 3d and 4th he is called at 8 A. M.; 2jst 'March, pays ?50 on ac count, and left on 7*30 P. M. train. , Arrived, March 25th; room 231— to tea, and left April 1st, on an afternoon train. Arrived again April 8th; room 228. Directly below Booth is registered, of that date, the name of A. Cox; residence not knawn;; itwas cut out by some one who cutout the name of Rooth, [The original memorandum is annexed to this re cord, marked Exhibit No. 4]. William E. Wheeler, A witness called forthe prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows :— By the Judge Advocate:— Q,. Where do .you reside? A. My.home Is in.Chicopee, Massachusetts. Q . Were you in Canada during the last autumn ? A. Yes sir. ., Q. At what point in Canada ? A. Montreal. Q. Didyou meet there citizens of the United States from tbe Southern States ? A. I met some. Q. Will you mention some whom you met there, and when? A. The only one there that I know the name of to swear to was Mr. Booth. Q. Do you mean John Wilkes Booth , the actor ? A. Y'essir Q. "Where did you meet him ? A. I was standing in front of the St. Lawrence Hall, Montreal , and saw him go across from a broker's ofhce on the opposite side. Q. What time was that? A. I cannot say the day exactly, but it was in October or November last. Q. Did you see any others who were pointed out to you by name? A. There was another man who came across with him; who he was I do not know, and never heard his name; I spbke to Mr. Booth when he came across, and asked him if he was going' to open the theatre there: he said no, he was not, and left me directly, and entered into conversation with a third man who was there, and some time after that, as I was walking along with a gentleman, he pointed him out to me as George Sanders. Q. You saw -Sanders and Booth In conversation to gether? A. Yes sir. Q. You did notsee Clement C. Clay or Jacob Thomp son? A. No sir, hot to know them. Q. You had met Booth beiore, and knew him? A. I had seen him play on the stage, in Springfield, Massa chusetts. No cross-examination. John Deveney, A witness called for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows:— By the Judge Advocate— Q,. Where do you reside? A. I am living in Washington at present; mv home is in Philadelphia; at least my father lives there. Q,. Were you during the past autumn or winter in Canada? A. I was. Q. At what point? A. At Montreal. Q. In what month were you there? A. I went over there in July, and left there on the 3d or 4th of Febru ary; I forget which. Q. Were you. or not, acquainted with John Wilkes Booth? A. Very well. Q. Did you meet him there? A. I did. Q. In company with whom did vou see him there? A. The first time I saw him in Canada, I saw him standing in the St. Lawrence Hotel, Montreal, talking with George, N. Sanders. Q. Can you tell about what time that was? A. lean- not tell you tne month, but from what I have seen in the papers I am constrained to believe it was in Octo ber; but I am not willingio swear it was in that month Q. Did they, or not, seem to be intimate? A. They seemed to be talking very confidentiallv. Q. Were they drinking together? A. Yes; I saw them go into Dowley's and have a drink together. Q. You mean George N. Sanders? A Yes; George N Sanders, who used to be Navy Agent at New York. Q. Did you see In Canada, at the same time, Jacob Thompson, of Mississippi, who was Secretary of tne Interior under the Administration of President Bu chanan? A. I saw Mr. Thompson. Mr. Ciav, Mr. Tucker and several others; they were pointed* out to me, but I was not acquainted with those gentlemen. Q. You mean Clement C. Clay, of Alabama, formerly United States Senator? A. That was the man; I mean ¦him; I presume he was the man; he was pointed out to me as that person. Q. Did you have conversations with Booth? A. Yes, I spoke to him; I asked him what he was doing there; I asked him, "Are yon going to play here?" knowing thai hewas an actor; he said no, he was not; said I, "What areyou going to do?" said he, "I just came here on a visit, a pleasure trip;" I saw in the papers after wards that he had been trying to rhake.an engagement with Buckland, of the Theatre Royal there; but I do not believe it. tt. You say you saw him talking to Clay, Sanders, Holcomb and Thompson? A. I believe I-did; I am not- very positive that I saw him talking to those parties, but I did see him talk to Sanders; that I can swear to because I was Standing up against a pillar In the hotel and it was right in the-, hotel; .Sanders was leaning against a pillar and Booth standing in front of him. Q. You say you have seen others with Sanders? A. Yes sir. ' I do, not know that I saw them there stand ing talking to Sanders that day. but I haveseen those other men with-Sanders at «ilfferent times, talking to him. * Q. And with Booth? A. I will not say that. *I saw Booth talking to Sanders, though. Of that I am posi tive, because these two were standing together when I came up: I just came from the post office, which is op* positetbe hotel; I came over ,and saw them talking there; I was surprised to see him., and that is what made me take particular notice of it; I thought, as a matter of course, he came there to play. Q. When was the next time yousaw Booth? A. The next time I saw Booth was on the steps of the Kirk- wood House, in this city, the night of the 14th of April. a few minutes before five, or between five and six o'clock. Q. What occurred then? A. He was going into the hotel; I was standing talking to a young man named Callan. I think, who works in.one ofthe Departments: he was formerly a sergeant of cavalry, I think ; I said to Callan,"! would like to go uptoWlllard'sHoteiand see if we can see General Grant:" I had never seen him: said I, "Will you come and go along?" He said '•No; I have got an engagement to be here at 'five o'clock, to meet some person." So I did not go, but went into the hotel, saying, " I wonder what time it is now; it must be time foryour friend to come, if be is coming." I went in and found itwas fiVe, or five minutes of it, and said I, 'T guess you can go now; that engagement is up;" hesaid. "No; I will wait alittle longer." Just then Booth passedmegoing into the hotel, and turned around and spoke to me I asked him when he came from Canada, for I did not know he had left there. He said he had been back for some time, and was going to stay heresome time, and would see me again; tasked, "Are you going to play here again?" said he, "No, I am not going to play again; I am in the oil business;" I laughed and joked at that, it beingacommon Jose to talk about the oil business;a few minutes afterwards I saw him coming down street on horseback, on a bay horse; I't ook particular notice what kind of a looking rig he had on the horse: I do not know what made me do it; tne next I saw of him I heard the speech and saw him jump out of the box at the theatre, and when he fell he fell on one hand and one knee, and I recognized him; he fell with his face towards the audience; I said, "He is John Wilkes Booth, apd he has.shot the President;" I made that re mark right there; that is tbe last everl saw of him, when be was running across ,the stage. Q. You say you are certain you saw him and Sanders drinking together, as well as talking?' A. Yes-s,ir, I did; I am sure of it; Sanders says he never saw him: but Sanders tells a lie, because he did see him; I saw him talking to him. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— Q. How long have you resided in this city? A. I have been off and on here for a year or two; I was formerly au officer in the army, Fourth Maryland Regiment, as lieutenant in Company E; Iwas intheemploy of Adams'. Express Company a great many years, and worked with them in Washington for some time. Q. Areyou acquainted with any of the prisoners? A. Not that I know of. Q. You are not acquainted with John H. Surratt? A. No, sir, I never saw hinvin my life to my know ledge. By the Court.— Q. Why did you say it was John Wilkes Booth, and that he had shot the Presiden? A. I did not know Mr. Lincoln had been* shot, but it flashed on my mind when Booth jumped' out of that box thathehaddonesuch a thing, because I knew th^ President was in the box; I saw him go in, and I heard the pistol shot and the words, " Sic Semper Tyrann is," and I knew from my school-boy knowledge that was the, motto of the State ot Virginia. By the Jud^e Advocate.— Q; Yon say Booth shouted "Sic Semper Tyrannts?" A. I heard the words in the box; I think it was Booth said that; I heard the words before I saw the man. Q. Had he his knifo in his hand as he went across the stage? A. He had. Q. Did he make any remark as he crossed the stase' A. It is said he did. but I did not notice It; the excite ment was so great that I did npt notice it: I can safely swear that I did not hear any remark; at least. I can not call to mmd that I did. Lieutenant-General Ulysses S. Grant, A witness called for the prosecution. being duly sworn. testified as follows:— J avvviU' By the Judge Ad vocate.-Q. Will you state whether you are acquainted with Jacob Thompson formerly Secretary of the Interior under President Buch^aK admin.stration ? A. I met him once: that was when caTied^hf^ ?Ef„8ppo?&0 Vick5burg, at what £ called Milhken s Bend and Young's Point; a little boat was discovered coming up on the opposite shore pu gndennirTtiKrreptItioualy' tr>'in8- to avoid detection. and a little tug was sent out from the navy to pick it upjwhentheygotto It they found alittle whfte flaa stlcking'outoithe stem of the row-boat, and Jacol TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 45 Thompson in it; they brought him to Admiral Porter's flag-ship, and I was sent for and met him; I do not re collect now the .ostensible business he had; there seemed to be nothing important at all In the visit, but he pretended to be under a flag of truce, and, there fore, be had to be allowed to go hack again. Q. Whenwastbat? A. Icannotsay whetheritwasin January or February, 1863; it was the first flag of truce we had, though. Q. Did he profess to be, and seem to be, In the mili tary service ofthe Rebels? A. He said be had been offered a commission— anything he wanted, but know ing that he was not a military man, he preferred hav ing something more hke a civil appointment, and he had taken the place of an Inspector-General in the Rebel service. Q. Did he. then hold that position? A. That was what he said, that he was an Inspector-General, or Assistant Inspector-General, with the rank of Lieu tenant-Colonel, I think he said. Q. The Military Department of Washington, as it Is. snoken of in military parlance, embraces the city of Washington, does it not, and did it not during the past year? A. Yessir. Q. And all the defenses of the city? A. Yes sir, and on the other side ofthe river and Alexandria. Q. It embraces all the fortifications on both sides? A. Yes, sir. Q. I have in my hand a copy of your commission as Lieuten ant-General of the Armies of the United States,bearingdatethe4th day of March, 1864; will you state whether or not since that time you have conti nued to be, in command, under that commission, of the Armies of the United States ? A. I have. [The Judge Advocate offered in evidence, without Objection, the commission of Lieutenant-General Grant, dated March 4, 1864, accompanied by General Orders No. 98, March, which are appended to there- cord, marked Exhibit No. 6,] Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— Q. Are you aware that the civil courts are in operation in this city, all of them? A. Yes, sir. "Q. How far towards Baltimore does the Department pi Washington extend? A. I could not say exactly to What point; any troops that belong to General Augur's Command, however, that he sends out to any point would necessarily remain under his command; he com mands the Department ot Washington. Q. Is any portion ofthe State of Maryland in the De partment ox Washington? A. Oh yes sir; martial law, I believe, extends to all the territory south of the railroad that runs across from Annapolis, running south to the Potomac and the Chesapeake. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q>. B v virtue of what order does martial law extend south of Annapolis ? A. I never saw the order; it is just simply an under standing. Q. It is just an understanding? A. Yes sir, just an tmderstanding that it does exist. G. You have never seen any order? A. No sir. (J. And do not know that such an order exists? A. No sir, I have never seen the order. Joseph H. Simonds, A witness called for the prosecution, being dnly sworn, testified as follows :— By the. Judge Advocate:— Q. Were yon acquainted with J.Wilkes Booth, fn his lifetime? A, I was. Q. What relation did you sustain to him— *were you his agent? A. I was his business agent, really. Q. In what region of country, and; in connection with what business? A. I was principally in the oil region; I did some little business for him in the city of Boston, but very little, which was entirely closed up before I . left there. Q. What was the character of his Interest there in the oil region ? A„ He owned a third undivideonnte- rest at first in a lease of three-and-a-half acres on the Allegheny river, near Franklin. . Q. For which he paid how much ? A. It was bought bymeaus of contracting to pay off the old debts of that lease and carry on the work; afterward the land interest was bought, he furnishing one-half of the pur- ehase'mouey of the land interest, and owning one un divided third as above stated. l ?no,wI«Klge of it was in Mav. 1864; I accompanied ?™w, le 0l1 re£lc?ils hi June, 1864, for the purpose of teeing charge of his business thero m?Af lJ.ave >'ou„eiven the total amount of the invest ment that Booth made? What do you consider the total amount? A. The whole amount invested in this ^n^r1"17 river. Property, in every way, was about ts glve tbe exact fi&Lires in dollars and Q. And the other investment was about SiGOO* A Yes, sir. . * Q. Making $6000 in all? A. Yes, sir. » Q. And that you know to have been a total loss to him? A. Yes, sir, that is, it was transferred; his busi ness was entirely closed out there in tbe latter part of September. 1864; I think on the 27th of September. Q. Was it placed in your hands as trustee, or to whom was it transferred? A. Theie were three owners, as I have told you. He held an undivided third. The three owners all decided to place the property in my hands as trustee to hold tor them. It was so mentioned in the deed, and their several names were mentioned in the deed. Immedi ately upon the execution of that deed he asked me to make a deed conveying his interest away, which I did in accordance with his instructions. These deeds were properly executed, conveying his whole interest away in that way. At the same time, this other interest in adifferent portion of the country, on a different stream, for which he had paid $1,000. he also, transfered, which was done by adifferent process, bv assignment on the receipt which he held for his interest. Q. This was all done last fall? A. It was done in September; I think the 27th or 28th of the mouth. I cannot be exact as to tne date. It was done the day he left Franklin, the last time I ever sawhim. Q. Were the conveyances without compensation or voluntary gifts? A. One was made to his brother, Junius Brutus Booth; which was without compen sation, but a consideration was mentioned in the deed. Q. But there was none in fact? A. No sir; none in fact ; the other was to me, and the same consideration was mentioned, but It was done in consideration of my services, for which I have never received any other pay Q. There was nothing paid him at all on either of them? A. No sir; not a dollar; and he paid all the expenses of the transfer and the conveyances. Samuel P. Jones, (blind,) a witness called for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows :— ' By the Judge Advocate.— Q. Have you rpsided in Richmond at any time during the war ? A. I have. Q. State any conversations you may have neard there, to which officers ofthe Rebel Govern ment were parties in regard to the contemplated assassination of the President of the United States. A. The nearest I know anything tothat point amongthe officers there, is their common conversation in camp, as I would go about amongst them, and their conversations would be of tbis nature :— That all suspicioned persons, or those kind ot people, they were not certain were of their wav of thinking, they would hush up as soon as thev came nearthem; butafter I found out what I could learn in reference to these things, thev were desperately anxious that any such thing as this should be accom plished. Q> Will you state any particular occasion? A. In a general way I have heard sums offered, to be paid with a Confederate sum, for any person or persons to go North and assassinate tbe President. Q,. Do you remember any occasion when any such offers were made or any amount named, and by what kind of officers? A. At this moment I cannot tell you the particular names of shoulder-straps, &c. Q. Do you remember any occasion— some dinner oc casion? A. I can tellyou this; I heard a citizen make thererrrark oncethat he wouldgive from his private Eurse §10,000 in addition to the Confederate amount to ave the President assassinated, to bring him to Rich mond, dead or alive, for proof. » Q. What was meant by that phrase, "in addition to the Confederate amount?" A, I know nothing about that, an v more than the way they would express it; I should judge, from drawing an inference, that there was any amount offered by the Government, in that trashy paper, to assassinate any officials that were hin dering their cause, and even I have heard it down as low as a private or citizen; for instance, if it is not di gressing lrom the purpose, I know of a Kentuckian, but cannot tell you the name now, that was putting up at the Exchange Hotel, or otherwise, Ballard House, (they belong- tothe same property, and are connected by a bridge over Franklin street); hewas arrested under suspicion of beiner a spy; I can tell you the name now, his name was Webster, if I remember rightly; I always supposed, from what I understood, that he came down to buy goodsj but they took him as a spy and hung him; whether it was in reference to this as sassination I cannot say. ¦ Q. I understood you to say that it was a subject- of general conversation among the Rebel officers? A. It 46 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. was; the Rebel officers.as they would be sitting around their tent doors, would be conversing on'such a sub ject 'a great deal; they would be saying they would like to see hiSfhead brought there; dead or alive, and they should think it could be done, and I have heard such things stated as that they had certain persons under taking it. Samuel B£n»PB> Cnester, A wKnesscalleei for the prosecution, being duly sworn testified as follows:— By the Judge Advocate.— CJ. Your profession is that of an actor? A. Yes sir. Q. Have you known J.Wilkes Booth a good many years? *A. I have known him about ten or eleven years, since I ftrst met him. CJ. (Juite intimately, I suppose? A. For about six or seven years intimately. '" CJ. Can you recall a conversation which you are sup posed to have had with him in November last in New York? Yes sir. Q. What time in the month was it? A. I think it was in November that I had a conversation with him. CJ. What time in November? State about the period of time. A. I cannot think of the exact date', but it Was in the early portion of November; one day we- were in conversation, and I asked him why be was not acting, and he told me that he did not intend to act in this portion of the country again; that he had taken his wardrobe to Canada,, and intended to run the blockade. CJ, Did you meet him1 after that, and have some con versation with him in regard to oil speculations, or was it at the same time? A. No sir; the next time I met him was about the time we were to play Julius CatsUr, which we did play on' the 25th of November; and it was either on the 24th' or 25th that he asked me to take a walk with him, or as*:ed if T knew some cos- tumers. where he might get some dresses for his cha racter in that play; and I asked him where his own wardrobe was. CJ. Was that in the city of New York? A. Yes; I never bad any conversation with him relative to. this affair out of New York; he said it was still in Canada, in charge of a friend, and I think he said, named Martin; I will not be positive, but I think he said it was in Montreal: he did not say anything to me at all about the oil business then, that I rem'ember. CJ. Did he not ask you how you would like to go into the oil' business with him? A. Not in the oil business; he nevermentionedthat. ' CJ ) Die told you he had a bigspeculation on hand? A. Yes, sir. CJ. Did he ask you to go in with him? A. Yes sir; I met him, and he was talkihg'with some friends, and thev were joking with him about the affair; I met Dim On Broadway: after he lei't them he said he had a bet ter speculation than that on hand, and one they would not laugh at; some time after that I met him again and he again talked ot this speculation, and asked me how I would like to go in with him; I told him I was without means, that I could not; and he said it did not matter, he always liked me and would furnish the means: the next time I heard from him he was in Washington. Q. State the whole of the conversation in which be urged you to go into this speculatipn in New York. A. As well as I can remember, I will tell you from beginning to end. He left me then in Ntw York. and I received several letters from him from Wash ington, telling me he was speculatingin farms in lower Maryland and was sure to coin money; that I must go with him to Virginia, and still telling me that I mustjoin him; that I paid very little attention to it. Then about the latter part of December or early in January, I will not be positive which it was, but late in December or early in January. h!e came to New York; I then lived at No. 45Grove street; he asked me to take a walk with him; I did so: we went put and went into a saloon known as the House of Lords, on Houston street; we remained there a considerable time; I suppose an hour, eating and drinking; he had* often mentioned this affair, that is, his speculation; but would never say what it Was? if I would askbim what it was he would say he would tell me by-and-by. We left there? and went to another saloon under the Re vere House, and ate somcoysters. We then started up Broadway: I thought it was time to go home., an dray way was down Bleepker street, that is. up Broadway from the corner of Houston, and I had to turn down Bleecker street to get to Grove street; I bade him good night. He asked me to walk apiece further up the street with him, andldidso; I walked a square, that is, to Fourth street, or next street; he asked me to walk up therewith him., and I did so; he asked me to walk up Fourth street because Broadway was crowded; he said Fourth street was not so full of peo ple as Broadway, and he wanted to tell me about that speculation: I walked up there with him', and when we got into an unirequented portion ofthe street, he stopped and told me tlvm that he was in a large con spiracy to capture the heads of the Government, In cluding the Piesident, and takethem to Richmond; I asked him if that was what he wished me, to go In; he said it was; I told him I could not do it, that It was an impossibility; only to think of my family: be said he had two or three thousand dphars that he could leave them- I still said I could not do it; be urged it, and. talked with me for, I suppose, twenty minutes or half an hour and I still refused: he then told.me that at least I would not betravhhn, and said I dare not; be said he' could implicate me in the affair, any how: h§ said that the party wer^sworn together, arid that If I attempted 'tofbetray them I would be bunted down through life, and talked some more about the affair; I cannot remember it now; but still, urging me, saying I had better go in; I told him no, and bade him good night, and I went home. Q Did he indicate to you what part he wished yoo to play in carrying out this conspiracy? A. Yes sir. CJ. What did he say ? A. That I was to open the back door of the Theatre at a signal. CJ. Did he indicateat what Theatre this was to occur? A. Yes; he told rne Ford's Theatre; because it must ha someone acquainted or connected with the Theatre who could take part in it. Q. Ford's Theatre in Washington ? A. Yes sir. Q. Did he urge you upon the ground that it was an easy affair, and that you would, have very little1 to do? A. Yes, he said that; that was alll Would have to do, he said. Hesaid the thing was sure to succeed. Q. What preparations did he say, if. any, had been made toward the conspiracy? A. He tqld me that everything was in readiness: that it was sure to suc ceed, lor there were parties, on the other side ready to co-operate with them. CJ. Did you understand from him that the Rebel Government was sanctioning what he was doing ? A. He never told me that. Q. What do you rnean by parties on the other side? A. I imagined that they .were on the other side, but be did hot say who they were: I mean they were those people; he said on the other side. Q. Did he mention the probable number of persons. engaged in the conspiracy? A. He said there were from fifty to a hundred; he said that when he first mentioned the affair to me. Q. Did he write to you? A. He wrote, about this speculation, ana then h&wrote to;me again;' that must! have been in January. Q. Have you those letters? A. I never kept my let* ters; every Sunday I devote to answering my corre spondents, and generally destroy their letters then. Q. Did he or not make you any remittance with a , view of enabling -you to pome to Washington ? A. Oh - 'yes sir ;¦ after I had declined going,1 had refused him, I got a letter from him stating that I must come ; this was the letter In. which he told me it was sure to suc ceed ; I wrote back that it was impossible; I would noi come : then, by return mail, I think. I got another let ter, with ?5!) inclosed, saying I must come, and must be sure to be there by Saturday night; I did not go; I had not been out of New York since last summer. Q. Can you remember the time you, received tb£ last letter with the $50 in it? A. That was in January, I think. ,. , Q. You say he said be had $1000 to leave to your fa mily? A. ' That was before, at the first interview. Q. Did he. at the time He sent you the first'$50, men tion anymore? A.. In tbe letter he did not. Q. Did he speak of having plenty of funds for. the purpose ? A . Not in hisletter. Q. Did he m his conversation ? A. Ip his conversa tion after he came to New York again, CJ. Whatdidhesay then? A. 'When he came to New York he called . Oh me again and asked metotakea walk with him, and I did so; he told me that he had been trying to get another party ; to join him name A John Matthews, andwben hetoldhimwhathe wanted to do that the man "Was very much frightened, indeed, and would hot join him, and he said he would not have cared if he had sacrificedbim; I -tpid him I did not thiblgjpt was right to speak in that manner; he said ho* he was a coward, and was not fit to live; he then asked me again to Join' him; he told me I rhust dp so; be said that there wasplenty ofmphey in theafiair; tbatif I would do it I Would never wantagaihaslong as I lived: that.I would nevfefTva"nt for mt>uey:'he said that the President and some of the heads of the Government came tothetheatreyeryfrequeutly during Mr. Forrest's engagements', I still urgedhim notto mention the affair to me: tPthink of_my poor family; be said he' would provide for my going-with him; I still refused; he said he would ruin meinthehrofessiOniflclidnotfiO' Itold mm I eouldnot help that, and begged of him not to mention the affair, tome; when he found I would no* go, he said he honored my mother and respected my wife, and he was sorry he had mentioned this Affair to mc,and told me to make my mind easy, he would trouble me about it no more; I then returned him'tha money he sent me; he said he Would not allow me to do: so, but that he was very short of funds— so very short that either himself or some of the party must go to Richmond to obtain means to carry out their designs CJ. H^ said, however, that there was plenty of1 money in the enterprise? A. Yessir. CJ. When did this last conversation ocour? A. That, I think, was in February, Q, Dldhehaveahy conversation with you at a later period, after, the inauguration,. as to the .opportunity whichhehad tor the assassination of the President0 Did he speak „of, that? A. Yes sir; on Friday one TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 47 week previous to the assassination, he was in New York. Q. What did he say then? A. We were in the House of Lords atthe time, sitting at a table, and had not been there long before he exclaimed, striking the table, "What an excellent chance I had ¦ to kill the Presir Qent^if Ihadw.vhcd.on Inauguration, Hay;" that was all he said relative to that. Ci. Did he explain what the chance was? A. No; he said be was as near the President on that day as he was to me; that is all he said. CJ, Can you tell at what time in February he said It would be necessary to send to Richmond for money? A. No sir; I cannot tell positively. Cross-examined by Mr. Clampitt.— CJ. Did he men tion any names of those who were connected with him in this plan as communicated to you in reference t$> the assassination of Mr. Lincoln? A. No, sir, not that I am aware of. CJ. You never heard him mention any names ? A. I never did. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q. Do I understand you to say" that bespoke to you of a plan to assassi nate the President and to capture him? A. To cap ture him (J. Did he sav anything to you as to how he would get him off? A. No. Q. As to where he would take him ? A. To Bich mond. Q. By what route ? A. He did not say. CJ. He spoke of there being persons on "the other eSde?" A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he use just simply that expression, or did he explain what he meant by the "other side." Whatdid you understand him to mean? A. He did not explain It at all, but I supposed it was in the South. Q. Across the lines? A. Yes, sir. Q. Across the river? A. Across the Potomac CJ. Did hesay nothing to you as to the means he had providedor proposed to provide for conducting the President after he «hould be seized? A. No, sir; on one occasion he toid me that he was selling off horses after he bad told me that he had given up this project. CJ, When did he say to you that he had abandoned Eie idea of capturing the President? A, Lu February, think.CJ. Did he say why he had abandoned it? A. Hesaid the affair had fallen through owing to some of the parties backing out. Q. Oh what day was it that hesaid to you what an excellent chance he had for killing the President? A. That was on a Friday, one week previous to the assas- Bi nation. CJ. On what day of April was that? A. The 7th. CJ. Did hesay 'any thing to you as to his then enter taining, or having before that en tertained, the purpose to assassinate the President? A. No,*sir. CJ-, Did he say anything to you then as to why he did not assassinate the President? A. No, sir; that was the only exclamation he made use of relative to it. Q. State his exact words if you can? A. He said, •Hvhat an excellent chance I had, if I wlshed.tokill the Presidenton inauguration day; I was on the stand as c^ose to bim.nearly as I am to you,5' That is as near his language as I can give. * * CJ. State how far he explained.to you his -project for capturing the' President in the theatre? A. I believe I ha.ye stated as far as 1 know. ' ' Qi Did he ever indicate how he' expected to get him from the box to the stage without being caught? A. No, sir.. ¦ . , CJ. Did he say how many were to help him in sensing the President?* A. No sirs < . CJ. Did he name any other officials who were to be seized besides the President? A. No; the only time he told me, hesaid uth6 heads of Vie Government, including GiePresidenV' Blithe Judge Advocate.— CJ. I understood you to say that he stated that the particular enterprise of cap turing the President and headsof the Government had been given up, and that in consequence he was selling off thehorseg he had bought for the purpose? A* Yes sir. Q. He-did not state to you what mode of proceeding had been substituted for that, out simply that that*one had been given up? A. He told me they had given up the affair. Q. That Ithad fallen through? A. Yessir. The Commission then adjourned until to-morrow, Saturday morning, May 13th. at 10 o'clock. THE PROCEEDINGS OF TUESDAY. Washington, May 16.— According to the intention declared at the closing of, the preceding session, the Court paid an informal visit, at half-past nine o'clock this morning, to the scene of the President's assassina tion. The visit was made at the suggestion of the Judge Advocate-General, i with the object of enabling the Court to acquire, by visual observation of the now historic locality, such a knowledge of it as would ren der a more perlect understanding of all the evidence dependent upon its intricacies accurate and more easy. The Court arrived at the appointed hour. Through the usual courtesy ofthe Judge Advocate-General, and ofthe President ofthe Court, the reporters ofthe Press were admitted. The announcement of the intended visit caused quiteacrowd to assemble at thefrontof the theatre. Nothing 13 changed there. Having seeu all there was to be seen, the several members started , for the Court room at the Penitentiary, and, on their entering it, the prisoners were brought into the dock, and many eyes instinctively turned towards Spangler, ' who sat down listlessly and leaned back against the wall, staring vacantly. During the reading of the record, Mr. Daniel Stanton, who was present, was permitted to amend the record of his own testimony delivered on the previous day. In the amendment, his answer to the question, "Did he ask in regard to General Grant?" now reads, "I meant" to say that the man did ask for General Grant," in lieu of "I don't recollect that he did." Mr. Stanton also added, that the man referred to said he was a lawyer, and knew Mr. Stantpn very well. The Court took its usual recess, after which the read ing of the lengthy record was resumed by Mr. D. F. Murthy. The reading being concluded, the Court pro ceeded to the reception of testimony for the prosecu tion.Examination of J© bin Sorrow, alias "Peanuts." CJ. State whether or not you have been connected with Ford's Theatre, in this city? A. Yes sir. CJ. In what capacity? A. I used to attend to the, stage door and carry bills in the day time; I attended to Booth's horse, stabling »«d cleaning him. Q. Do you know John Wilkes Booth? A.I knew him while he kept his horse in the aUey in that stable there. CJ. Immediately back of the theatre? A, Yes sir. CJ. Did you seejbim on the afternoon of the assassina tion? A. I saw him bring a horse into the stable, .about . five or six o'clock. Q. State what hedid? A. Hofcroaght him there and halloed out for Spangler. CJ. Did Spangler go down to tho stable? A. Yes, sir; he asked him fora halter, and he went down for one^ Q. How longdid he remain there? A. I don't know; I think Maddox was there, too. Q. Did you see him again that evening? A. I did, on the stage, that night. CJ. Did you, or n0t,seehlm when became with his horse, between nine and ten o'clock? A. No, sir, I did not. CJ. Did you see the horse at the door? A.I saw him WhenSpangler called me out to hold him. CJ. State all that happened at that time: did you see Booth when became with his horse? A. No, sir. CJ. Did you hear him call for Spangler? A, No sir; , ut I heard a man call Ned, and tell him Booth wanted bim. General Giant and the President 1 A.,Ko>sir: X don't remember that he.did. CJ. Was there orwas there hot anythingsaid fn the course ofthat conversation as to what might or might not be done to. the- President!, cur ©enerat Grant? M?., Ewing ©bjectedtdthelast three questions, and insisted on his objection being entered upon, the.re- cordr.which itwas. Cross-examination* by Mr. Ewing.— Q. Did you say yoadidnotheaTanybodycaliing-outforSpanglerf A. I heard Devecney eall him, and telling him that Mr. Booth wanted him out in the alley. CJ. Who is Deverney? A. An actorin the theatre. Q. HowTong-was it after that before Spangler called you? A. Not very long; about six oi-seven or eight minutes:. Q. What were- you doing when Spangler earned you? A* Sitting in> front ofthe door entrance on theleit. Q. What business were you doing?/ A. I was attend ing to-thestage door. ¦Q, What had you to do- at tbestage door?- A. To keep strangers out,, and not allow them in iinless. they belonged there. Q. And you told him you could not hold the- horse, afid hadto-attend the door; and'he said'if anything went wrong to lav the blame on him?: A. Yessir: U. Wereyou inTfront ofthe theatre that night? A. I was out there while the curtain was down. Q. You went out at every act? A. I go out every night every time the curtain is down. CJ. Was Booth in front of the theatre? A. No sir; I did no&'See-him. CJ. Was Spangler in front of the theatre? A. No sir. CJ. Did you ever see Spangler wear a moustache? A. No sir. CJ. Do you know whether Spangler bad: an any whis kers that night? A- No sir, 1 did not see any. CJ. Was- not Spangler in the hahit of hitching up Booth's horse? A. Yes, he wanted to- take the b-ridie off, and Booth wouldn't let him, Q. When? About e-ix o'clock; he didn't take it off, but he put a halter round his neck, and took the sad dle off. jEJ. Was not Spangler in the habit of bridling, sad dling and hitching upBooth's-horse? A. Yes, when I was not there he would hitch himup_ Q. Was bein the- habit of holding him when you were not about? A.. Yes* and heruse& to- feed him When I was not there. Q. You and Spangler together attended! to Booth's horse? A. Yes; Mr.Gifford said he would givemea good job if I knew how to* attend to- horses; I said I knew something- about it, and that is how I got to attending on Booth's horse. Q. Doyou know the way Booth went out after he jumped outof the President's box? A. No-siir I was out at the time. Q. Do you know that passage between the green room and scenes, which leads to the back door? A. Yes, on Che other sideofthestage. Q. The one that Booth ran through? A. I don't Kjiow which entranceBooth ran through. Q. Was Booth about the theatre a great deal?" A. He was'nt about there much; he came there some times. -¦ ¦ <¦ '¦ Q. Which way did he enter generally? A. Oru Tenth street. ° Q,. Didn't he sometimes enter the back way? A. Sometimes. Q. How far is the stable where Booth kept his horse from the'baek entrance, of the theatre? A. Two hun dred yards-. ' (J. Doyou-reeoHect what act was beirigpTaved when you first went outto hold Booth's horse? A. Ithmki* was ¦ the first scene of the third actr the scene at curtains across the door; it was the first scene. CJ. Was- that scene' being played1 whew you went out? A.. Yes, sin- they hadjustbcen closing in. CJ. Didyou ever have the name of "Peamats?"" A, That's a name theygaveme when I kept astand there. .By Judge Holt. —CJ. DidBooGhhave more than one horse there?' A. No sir, Q. Did I understand you to say there was- enry one horse in thestahle that afternoon1? A. That is" all 1 saw, and I was there between five and six o'clock. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Do you- know- what side of tbe theatreSpanglerworked on? A. On this, side, on the left; hechaiaged the scenes on theJeft. Q. Is that the side the President's box was orr? A, Yessir. ¦Q. Was-that theoidteyou attended the door on?/ A Yes sir, that's the side. <&. Whemyonwere away didn't Spangler attend to the door for you ? A. Yes sir. Q. His position was near where your position was? A. Yes sir. Q. Whatdoorwas' that; was it the- floor that went into the little alley? Yes sir: the alley from Tenth street. CJ. You attended' there to see that nobody cam* in who was not authorized? A- Yessirr whentbecurtain was down I used to go outside. Q. .When the play was. going on who rms tnereQn thatside wboshovedthesceniesexeept Spangler? A, There is-anofcher man on that side; two work on that '. side„arrd three on theother. Q*. Wha was the man that worked with Spangler on i that side? A. I thinlchis nameisSimonds. ¦CJ. Who* works- on. the other side?' A. One is SirkaBi, Q. When flhe play fe going ©n da these mea always istay there? A. Yessir. ¦ Q. They had to stay to-sho-vethe'scenes?' A- Yes sIr , always so as to be therewhen the whistle blows, but sometimes when the scene would tost a whole act they- would go on the other side- , Q. Did they not go out? A. Sometimes, they would gaout; not very often though. By Judge-Holt.— Q. Was. there1 another horsein that stable any day before? A. There were two en -on* day. ¦' ¦ CJ. How long before that was it that there were two? A. Booth, brought a horse and Buggy there-on*. Sunday. CJ.. What was, the appearance of the horse? A It , was alittlehorse; I don't remember the color. ¦. .ft. Do you remember whether he was Mind of one eye?' A. No sir; the fellow who brought the horse, thereused to go with Booth very often, Q. Doyotrseethat manamongthe prisoners here— I meantheman that brought the* horse? A. No-sir.I* don'tsee him. here; this fellow. I think, liveainthe Navy Yard: I saw him go in a house one day the» when JLcarried thehiilsdown.. By the Coui t..— CJ. Did you see Booth the instant h» left the back door afterthe assassination of thePresF-' dent? A. Yessir, when he ro&eeff.. Q,. Now which door was itrthe small or the large on& that he- caniu out? A- The small door. Q. "Wasanybody elseattiiat door? A* I didn't see anybody else. Q,. Did1 Spangler pass throxrgii the: door into the passage and back again whale you were sit ting, at the door? A. I didn't take notice. Qr. You didn't see him go out or come in while you were there? A. No sir. Q. You say he was in the President's box the day ofthe murder. Whattime-of day was that? A. . Q,. Djd all of you know that the President was to be there that night? A- I heard Harry. ForcL say so1. Q/. Did you hear Spangler speak of it? A* I told kirn the President was to- come there. Q,. What time was that? A. About three' o'clock, wflen we went to take thepartition out. Q,. "Who went into the box with, you at that time? A. There, was me, Spangler and Jake. Q,. Whois Jake? A* TheyeatthimJake^that's all I know* Q. Is h-e a black or a white man? A. A white man* * * Q. How was lie employed In the theatre? A. He is a stage carpenter. Q,.. Is h& employed- there- regularly? A- Ha was at work there, night and day. Q,. Ho had been there for some time? A. For. <. three weeks-. i Q,. How long did yon stay with- them in the : box? A- Till we took the partition out,, and af ter that we.sat down, in the box. ci. Did you observe what else they did in the | box? A. No; Spangler t&iid it would be a nice place to. sleep, in. Q,. Did you observe anybody hankering: witn the lock of tbeinterior door? No,,sir_ Q. Doyouknowanythingof the preparation of that bar inside.? A. No.sir; there were three * music stands there> and I threw them down on the stage; they were; left there thenight there ; was a ball in the theatre. C&, Doyotr know Whether it is- cwstomary to have that bar there ? A . No sir. Q. There never was anything of that kind there before. A. No sir. j Q,., You don't know who pat the bar there? A. No* sir. Q,. Nor. who made the preparation for it ? A. No sir; I brought tho flags in a box and left them- there; after we- got through that I brought the- box that had contained! the* flags and came down. Qj. Whocarri'edtholceysofthepi-tvate'boK? A.* They were*arways-left in toe- box office. Q,. Do»you know whioJ>esi£es> load been tliere that day ?. A. No sir, I do not. Q,* Did yQ.a see any body in. the box occupied TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT' WASHINGTON; 49 by the President during the day except when Spangler and yourself were there? A. No sir. Q. who fixed arid repaired the locks on the private boxes generally ? A. 1 don!t know sir. (X Were there locks on the private boxes? A. Yessir. [ >•'' ¦' Q. Inside or outside? A. Inside. < How far was he from you when you flaw him? A. About as far as from here to that win dow, about fifteen feet, or a little further. Q. It was not Spangler holding the horse? • A. I do not know; it seems as though it was be tween three— I am not. certain; there were three men altogether who held him. Wm. A. Browning;, sworn. . By Judge Holt.— Q,. Will you state if you are the ¦ Private , Secretary of the President? A. Yes. Q. Were you with him on the nightof tbe 14tb of April? A. I was. Q,. What knowledge have you of the card hav ing been sent by J. Wilkes Booth? , Ai Between the hours of four and five o'clock I left Vice- President Johnson's room in the Capitol; I went into the Kirkwood House, where I was boarding with him; went up to the office, as I was accus tomed to do, and saw a card in my box; Vice President Johnson's box and mine were adjoin ing; mine was No. 67 and his 68; the clerk of the hotel, Jones, handed me tbe card. Q. What was on it? A. '(Beading from the card). "Don't wish to disturb you; are you at home? J. WilkesBooth." Q,. You don't know the handwriting of Booth, do you? A. No sir. Q. And had no.aequaintance with him what ever? A. Yes, I had known him when he was playing in Nashville, Tenn.; I met him several times there; that is the only acquaintance I had with him. Q. Did you understand the card as sent to tbe Vice-President or yourself? A. At the time I attached no importance to it; I thought peiv haps Booth was Was that all that occurred between you? A. Yes. Q. He did-not go in the house or attempt to go in ? A. No. Q. Were you on the* steps at Secretary Stan ton's house'? A. I was near the top. Q. Was he on the steps ? A. He was; I should judge, about two or three steps below me, about the third step from the pavement. Q,. Did he leave the step while you were there? A. He left the step after I spoke to him: he was talking; I did not quite understand what he was saying; he walked away towards the tree-box, ank seemed to reflect on something; I then turned my eyes off and didn't see him any more. Q,. Are you certain you did not see anything more than that? A. Nothing more. Q. The house was illuminated, was it? A. Yes; it was very light; it was lighted from the inside, and pretty light outside too. Cross-examined by Mr. Cox.— Q. What is your business? A. I- am employed at the War De partment, in the Secretary's room. Q. Had you ever seen the man you mention before that evening. A. I do not think I have to my knowledge. Q. Have you ever seen him since? A. Yes, in prison; in this prison, or the one adjoining, on last Sunday week. Q. Did you come down to see if be was the same man? A. When I first started to come down I did notknow it was for that purppse; I was with Major Eckertand Major Knox; I in quired when we arrived at the prison if I was to come in; the Major told me to come in; when I was inside the building I did not know thepur- pose until Major Eckert called in the priso ners the moment I saw that man I thought I knew the objectof my coming down. CJ. And this is the only occasion you recollect of having seen him ? A. That is the only time except to-day. Q,. What made you think it was the same man ? A. The first time I saw him it was very Ught; be bad on a dark suit of clothes and a heavy moustache; while I was speaking With him I was looking right sharp in his face; he had on a dark slouch hat, not very high, and a dark dress coat; his pantaloons were dark; I could not say whether they were black or brown. Q,. What was his size? A. I should fudge he was about my size; though, as hewas standing on the steps below me, he might seen lower; I should judge be was about 5 feet i or 5 inches high. , Q. Had a crowd come there to serenado tbe Secretary at that time? A. Yes; there were three or four bands there. Q. Was theSeci-etaf y on the steps at the time? A. No; he was inside the bouse; General Grant also; there was nobody on the stops but myself. Q. Were the crowd close up to tho steps?_A. Yes; up to the lower steps. Q. Was the door open at the time? A. Yes; the front door and the inner dooif and the gas was fully bghted all around. Testimony of Dr. Robert Kins: Stone. Examined by Judge Holt.— Q,. State to the Court if you are a practising physician in this city? A. lam. Q,. State whether or not you were the physi cian of the late President of the United States? A. I was his family physician. Q. State whether or not you called to see htm on the evening of the assassination. If so, state the examination and the result. A. I was sent for by Mrs. Lincoln»immediately after the*assas- sinationand was there within a few minutes; the President had been carried from the theatre to the house of a gentleman who lived directly' opposite, and placed upon a bed in the back part of the house; I found several citizens there, and among others two assistant surgeons of the army,. who had brought him over; they imme diately gave over the case to my care in conse quence of my professional relation to the family. I proceeded to examine him, and instantly found that the President had received a gunshot wound in the back part and left side of his head, into which I carried readily my finger, and ai once informed those around that the case was hopeless: that the President would die; that there was no positive limit to his life, as his vital tenacity was very strong; that he would resist as long as any one, but that death would certainly follow; I remained with him as long as it was of any use to do anything for him but of course nothing could be done; he died tha next morning about half-past seveD; it was about half-past ten when I first saw him that night. Q,. Did he die from that wound? A. Yes R. Did you extract the ball? A. I did the next day when the body was ready to be embalmed, in the presence of Dr. Barnes, the Surgeon- General, and others; when the examination wag made I traced the woundthrongh the brain; the ball was found in the interiorpart ofthe left side ofthe brain; it was a large ball, resembling those shot from the pistol known as the Der ringer; an unusually large ball, that is a larger' ball than those used in ordinary pocket re volvers. Q. Was it a leaden ball? A. Yes, a hand made ball, from which the tag bad been cut from the'Side; the ball was flattened or com-., pressed somewhat in its passage through tho skull, or a little portion had been cut iu its pas- sage through the bone; I marked the ball with the initials of the President, in the presence of the Secretary of War; sealed it up with\my private seal, and indorsed my name on the enr' velope; the Secretary inclosed it in another en velope, which he also indorsed and sealed witb his private seal; it is still in his custody, having been ordered to be placed among tbe archives of his Department. Q. Did you see the pistol from which the ball was fired? A. I did not. „ Testimony of Sergeant Silas 1>. Cofl*. Examination by Judge Holt.— Q. State whether or not on the night of the assassination of the President you were on duty at the Navy YardBridge? A. I was. Q. Do you remember to have seem one or two men passing rapidly on horseback, and if so at what time?, A. I saw three men approach me rapidlv, on horse back, between 10J£ and 11 o'clock, I should think. Q. Did you challenge them? A. Yes; I challenged them and advanced to recognize them. Q. Did you recognize them? "A. I satisfied myself 52 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. . _ v- tliat they were proper persons to pass, and passed them. • Q. Do you recognize either of these persons as among the prisoners' here? Look tbe Entire distance df the box. from one end to tlie other. The witness scrutinized each of the prisoners closely, ahd replied, Q. Could you describe either of these men, or both of thetn? A. i couid. ' ¦ ' CJ. Do you think you would recognize either or them by a photograph? A. I think I would; (a photograph of Booth was shown to,, the witness;) yes, that man passed first. Q. Alone? A. Yes. Q. Di&y6u not say that threecametogetraer? A. jNo; three passed, but they were not together. . CJ. Did you have any conversation with this first man as be passed? A. Yes, lor three! or four minutes. Q. What.name did .lie give? A. He gave his name as Booth. r ..*,'&.' CJ. What did he say? ' A. I asked him what his name was: he answered Booth; I asked him "where from?" he~answered,i'from the city;" I asked, him, "Where are you going?" "Going home:" I asked him where his home was; he said in Charles, which I under stood to mean Charles county; I asked ,.him what town?" hesaid he did'nt live in any town; ,1 said you must live in some town; he, said, "X live close to Bry- aritown.bnt I do not live in town;" I asked him why ha was out so late; If he did not know that persons were not permitted td pass aiter that time ot night; he said it was news to him: he said he. had some ways to S, that it was dark, and that' he thought he would veamooQ. * • C. How long before the other two men came? A. The nex-t one cameup in fiveorseven minutes, or pos sibly ten minutes. , . . , , CJ. Did they seem to be riding rapidly or leisurely? A. The second one who came up did not seem, to be riding so rapidly. Q. what did he Ray? A. I asked who he was; he said bis name was Smith; that he was going to White Plains;! asked him how he came to he out so late: he made use or a rather indelicate reply, from, which I sbouldjudge he had been in bad company. CJ. Was.hea large or small sized man? A. A small sized man. CJ. Did yon have a good view of his face? A. I did; I brought him up befdrethe guard-house door so that the lightcouldlallon his face. CJ. How' would her compare in size "With the last man among the prisoners (Harold)? A. He is very nearly fch-e, sizerb\if>I should, not think he was the man; he had, a Jag titer complexion than that man. , , CJ. Did you allow him to pass alter that explanation? A, Yes. ' ci.'What became ofthe other man?, A. The other man I turned back; he did not seem to have sufficient business to warrant me in passing him. T&. Was heonhorsebackalso? 'A- Yes. £J. Did he seem to be a companion of the prisoner Who hadgone-before? ,A. Idon,otknow. Xl- Did, they, come up together? A. 3S[o; they were some distance apart. ^3,. Did this man rhakeahy'iniiuiry for Booth? A. He rn%de an. inquiry whether a man had passed on a roan biprse? • CJ. Did the second one who had come up make any inquiry in regard to another horseman? A. 'No sir, noue whatever. 13. What was the color of the second horse? A. It was a roan horse. Testimony of Folic Graham. Examined by Judge- Holt.— Ci. State whether you we're on the road between Washington and Bryan- town on the 'night ot, the Hth of April last? A. Yes,, ^fe. Yon were going to Washington ? A. Yes. cers, besides some cavalry. CJ. Whoweretheofficers? A.SimonGalligar,Joshua Boyd, and William Williams. CJ. What civilian went with you the first. time? A. Dr. George Mudd. Q. When you were at Dr. Mudd's the second time do you not recollect that he told you tbe two men started from bis house to go, to Bev. Mr. Winner's? A. Yes sir, but I paid no attention to that; I thought it was a blind for the purpose of throwing us off the track. CJ. But he said that? A. Yes sir, he stated that they inquired lor Parson Wilmer's, and that they said they wereon their way to Allen's Fresh. CJ. Did he mention that both times you were there? A. I think only the first time. , . Q. Are you sure it was not out of doors that you first asked Dr. Mudd for the razor? A. I might have spoken to him about it out of doors, but I remember having made the demand in the house. CJ. Areyousure that it was not before he got to the house he told you tbe boot had been louudfsince you were there before? A. He told me that in the house, not outside., CJ. Was there not a citizen named Hardy with you at that time? A . Not that I know of. Q. Was there not a citizen with Dr. Mudd? A. There was a citizen, who spood outside the door after we went into thehouse; I do not know his name. •iCJ. Was Dr. Mudd alono when, you met him coming to the house? A. There was a.citizen walking with him I think. Q. Was it this man you speak of as having subse? quently stood outside the door? A. It was. Cross-examined by Mr. Stone.— CJ. When you went to Dr. Mudd the first time did you have any conversa* tionwith bim beiore you went into the house? A. I think not: I had a conversation with his wi.e. CJ. As soon as you asked him whether two strangers had been there, he told you at once they had? A. Yes sir; he was made aware of the nature of our errand.il suppose, by a friend; he seemed very much excited, and turned very pale when he was firstasked about the two strangers, though he admitted they had beep there. CJ. You asked him to describe them, and he gave yon the description?, A. Yessir. CJ. By whom did hesay he wasjutroduced to Booth last fail? A. Amanby the nameof Johnson. Q. He told you he was introductd to Booth by John son atchurch? A. He did not tell me that in the first place; be told me he did not knowBouth at all. Q. When, on the occasiuii of your second interview, you mentioned the name or Booth, he then told you he had been introduced? A. I did nut mention it until we were on horseback, thongh I bad previously mentioned Booth's name to theother doctor. Q. You say that Dr. Mudd seemed to be very much alarmed? A. Yes: he turned very pale in tho lace aud blue about the lips, like a num who was Ingbtened at the recollection of something he had done. , Q- Did he mention, in connection with his intro duction to Booth, the name of Thompson? A. I un derstood him to say Johnson, but Thompson might have been the name. ' 4. - By Judge Advocate Holt.— Q,.' You state that Dr. Mudd appeared very much frightened; did you ad,- dress any threat to him? A. No sir; Iwas in citizen's clothes at the time. Q. His alarm then was not in consequence of any thing thatyou said or done? A. No sir; he seemed very much concerned when I turned the boot inside out; some of the men present said that the name of 54 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Booth had been scratched out, when I suggested that it had not been written. JL CJ. You have stated that when you asked Dr. Mudd whether the two strangers had any arms, he replied that the one with the broken leg had a brace' of Revolvers: did he say anything about1 the other having a carbine or a kniie? A. No sir. Q. Didyou understand bim to say that this brace Of revolvers was aH the arms the stranger had? The question was objected to by Mr. EWing as being a' leading question. The following was then put:— CJ. Will you state what was his mariner? Was it frank or evasive? A: Very ¦ evastve; he; seemed to be very reserved. .CJ. Did hfi speak of these men as having any other weapons than the brace of pistols of which you have tffeoken? A. To my knowledge one ofthe officers spoke to him on that, point. CJ. Which one? A. I think it was Williams. CJ. I understand you to say that Dr. Mudd stated that he did not hear the news of the assassination of thePresideut until Sunday morning, at church. At the time of this statement to -you did he mention tbe name ot theassassra? A. No sir. '- By Mr. Fwing.-=Q. Did not Dr. Mudd, at your first Interview, state that he heard tbe details of the assassi nation while at church, on Sunday morning? A. I do not, recollect* that he did. I made a remark to one Of the' officers, at the time, that he must have been aware Of the assassination, because the cavalry were all along the road, and everybody in the, neighborhood knew it on Saturday. Q. Did Dr. Mudd state to you that the strangers were jroing in the direction of Allen's Fresh, in connection with his statement that they had gone to the Bev. Dr. Winner's ? A. He said that they inquired for Mr. Wil- mer; that he took them across the swamp, a-hd that they were going in the direction of Allen's Fresh.- I went to Mr. Wilmer's, attd searched his house, but I wassatisfled we would find nothing there:, as I looked npon it as a blind to draw us'off'-that way. CJ. In going from Dr. Mwdd'sto Mr. Wilm'er's, would you cross the swamp? A. Yes sir; you can go that way. Q. Did you follow the track of this man Booth and his companion? Ai Yes sir; as far as I could. By the Court.— CJ. When you reached Mudd's house on Tuesday morning after the assassination was it gene rally understood there that Booth was the man who killed tho President? A. Everyperson around Bryan- town and along the way understood sb. CJ. Is there a telegraph line in that section?* A. The only telegraph of which I have any knowledge is the One that runs to Point Lookout; I do not know the exact distance to that place; there was a telegraph connection with Port Tobacco, but if any person who saw these men wanted to give information concerning them they need not have gone far; by merely going out on the public road they could have given it, as the cava] ry were all along there. CJ: What is the distance from Washington to Sur rattsville? A. About ten miles, Isbould judge. CJ. What is the distance from Surrattsville to Dr. Mudd's? A. By the way we first went.it was about sixteen miles to Bryantown, and about four and a half miles from there to Dr. Mudd's. CJ. In going to Mudd's, do you go through Surratts ville? A. Yes. There is a road running from Port To bacco, by which you can go there. Dr. Mudd's is about twenty miles beyond Surrattsville by way of Bryan- town. Mr.JEakin.— CJ. Areyou acquainted with Mr. Floyd, who keeps the hotel at Surrattsville? A. I arrested him on Friday, the 18th of April. CJ. Did he make any statement to you? A. Yes, sir. CJ. What did he say concerning his connection' with th'e affair? JudeeAdvocate Bingham objected to tbe question on the ground that it was an attempt to discredit the testimony of Floyd, by showing that he had made statement in conflict with representations made be fore the Court. The question was understood to be withdrawn by Mr. Ewfngf CJ. From whom did you first'hear that two men had stayed at Dr. Mudd's house? A. I heard it from a sol dier. Q. Doyou know his name? A. Yes sir; his name was Lieutenant Dana. CJ. Did Dr. Mudd say anything to you about it? A. He did; I sent for him, took him up into a room ofthe hotel and asked him to make his statement, which he did. Joslana Xjloyc!, Sworn. Q. State whether or not some day after the assassi nation ofthe President you were engaged with Others in pursuing the assasins? A. Iwas. CJ. Did you. in the Course of yfcur pursuit, go to the house ofthe prisoner, Dr. Samue" Mudd? A. Yessir. CJ. On what day did you go there? A. On Monday, April 18th. , , Jr .CJ. State what reply he made to your inquiry in re tard to the object of your pursuit. A. laskeahimif he. knew, that the President had, been assassinated; he replied that he did; 1 then asked him if he had seen any parties looking like the assassins pass that way, afl,d hesvrid he had not. Q. That was at the first interview ? A'. Yes sir. Q. What did he state attbesecondmterview? A. He then acknowledged that two men had stopped there, ahd that he had set the broken limb of one of them; we showed him the likenesses, and he said he had seen them before: I then asked him had ne been introduced to Booth last fall, and he said he had. , CJ. How long did he say these men remained at his house? A. 1 think he 'said they rcmamd there from four o'clock in the morning until 4 P. M. -.,.„, CJ. Did he say they were on horseback or on foot ? A. He said that one was on horseback and the other was walking and leading a horse. . A photograph of Booth was shown to witness, and recognized by him sis the one which he had in his pos session, and which he exhibited to Dr. Mudd. Q, What was the Doctor's manner? A. lleappeared to be very much excited; when we went there the se cond tame he was not in, and his lady sent lor him: she appeared to be greatly worried. Q, What did you say to him at the second visit? A, Very little conversation took place on my part, as I did not feel very well. CJ. Did he make any reference to his previous denia of having seen these men? A. I do not know that fuV did; after we found the boot be owned up. and saio that he had formerly been introduced to Booth by & man named Thompson; fie did not say anything abou' beingin company with him rh Washington city. During the cross-examination the witness stateti that Mudd at first denied having seen the supposed as sassins', or even any stranger^. The prisoner stated when arrested that at tbe time of his introduction tc Booth by the man Thompson he was informed that Booth came there to buy some property; at the time ofthe witness' first visit to Mudd, the latter stated that he had heard ofthe President's assassination at church on Sunday Dr. George Mudd was then pre sent; On Friday, the day of the second visit, the boot found in thehouse was produced upon the arrival of the prisoner at his home and while the party were waiting for him. Colonel H. H. Wells, sworh,— CJ. Are you Provost Marshal of the defenses south of Washington? A. Yes sir. \ CJ. State^to the Court whether, in the week subsequent to the murder of the President, you had an interview with the prisoner, Dr. Mudd? A. Yes sir; I had an in terview with him on Friday, April 2lst. Cj. State all that he said to you hi regard to the men who called at his place on Saturday morning after th* murder. A. I bad three definite conversations with him: the first occurred, I think, about noon on Friday; I had the doctor brought to my headquarters, and took his statement- ho commenced by remarking that onSaturday morning, about 4 o'clock, he was aroused by a ioud knock at his door; he was surprised at the loudness of the knock, and inquired who was there; receiving some reply, as I understand, he looked from the window or- went to the door, and saw two horses and a second person sitting on one of the horses: he described the appearance ofthe persons, aud said that the youngest of the two was very fluent in his speech* and that the person on horseback bad broken his legi and desired medical attendance; be assisted in bring ing the person who was on horseback into his house and laying him upon the sofa in the parlor, and after sometimehe was carried upstairs and laid on a bed. in what was called the front room; he then proceeded to-examinethelegand discovered that the outward bone was broken nearly at rght angles across the limb, about twoinches above the instep: he said it was not a. compound fracture, and that the patient complained ol painin Ins back, but he found no apparent cause for the pain, except as proceeding from the effect of a fall from ahorse, as the patient stated he had fallen; he said' that he dressed the limb as well as he was able to do with the limited facilities at his command, and called a white hired servant to make a crutch for the patient* the crutchwas made and breakfast was then prepared, and the younger ofthe two persons, the one who was uninjured, was invited to breakfast with them; the pri- sonerf urther stated that alter breakfast he noticed his patient to be much debilitated and pale; the vouna man made some remarks In relation to procuring* some conveyance for taking his friend away, and that some timeaiterdintierhe startedwitb him to seeifacar- riage could beprocured; after traveling for some dis tance and Jailing to procure a carriage, the young man remarked that he would not go any further, but would return to the house and see ifhecould not get his friend away; the doctor stau d» also that after going to the town, which was the farthest point of his journev be returned to his house about4P.M.; in speakine ofthe wounded man I asked him if he knew who the person was, to which be replied that he did nqtreeOgmzehira; I then exhibited to him what was said to bo a miniature of Booth , and he said that from the miniature he could not recognize him: he stated. however, in answer to another question, that he met Booth sometime in November; I think he said that he was introduced by a Mr. Thompson to Booth; I think the introduction to Booth took place at church on a Sunday morning, and after the introduction had been grven. Thompson said that Booth wanted to nnr- cbaselarming lands; tbeyhad some conversation on the Bubject of lands, aud then Booth asked the ques- TRIAL OF THE, ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 55 tion whether there were any desirable horses that could be bought cheap in 'that section, and he men tioned the names of several dealers in desirable stock in the neighborhood; Tasked him if he could recog nize again the person whom he then met under the name of Booth; hesaid he could, and I asked him If he had seen Booth at any ¦ time after' the in troduction in November findi bfiorV to' his arrival there on Saturday morning; he said he had not; I asked him if' he had a'njf' suspicions of the character of Booth, or either of these persons; he saad hehadnot, but.that after breakfast he thought there was something strange about'their actions in view of the fact that the young^miLm came down stairs and asked for a razor, and said his friend wanted to shave himself, and that shortly afterwards he noticed that the person answering to tbe nameoi Booth hadshaved, -off his moustache; I askedhim if the man had a beard, when he said that he had, and that it was larger, than my own. but he could notdetormine whether it was nauural or artificial; that he kept a shawl1 about his neck and seemed to desire to> conceal the lower part of , his face; I asked him at this time if he had heard of the murder of the President; bereplied that he bad not: I think, however, heremarked to mein one of his in terviews, that he heard o£ the assassination for the i first time on Sunday morning, or 'late in the evening of Saturday; my incnaression< is that be did not hear of it until, after these . «J. Was he alarmed? A. He was much excited. CJ. And alarmed? A. Not at the first or second in terview, but at the third he was. CJ. What time of! Friday did you have yonr first in terview with him? A. Not far from midday; it might have been before or in the afternoon. Q> How long after was it that Lovett was gone for Dr. Mudd? A. I am not certain; I don't think I sent Lovettfor Mudd. . Q- It was on the Friday after the assassination? A. I thinkitWas. sir; on the 21st. Q. At the first interview did you have any written ¦Statement made? A. Nosir; I kept on talking with him, and, after I thought I had the facts,, I hadit taken down in writing; we had a dpzenj nter views at least. ^J. When was the last interview? A. On Sunday, I think. CJ. Did yon have any more than one on Friday? A. Yes; he was in my presence for almost five hours; we were talking there from time to time. * Q. You said that at the last interview he was much alarmed from some statement, ywu made? A. I said to him that be was concealing the facts, and that I did not know whether heunderstood that was thestrongest evidence that could be produced of his guilt at that tjine, and might endanger nissafety. : , CJ, When was it you went off with Dr. Mudd, and he tool? you along the route which these two men took? A. On Sunday morning, I am quite confident. CJ. Hespbkeof their taking the direct road to Piney dhapel? A. Yes sir, to Dr. Wilburs, of Piney Chapel. Q, You spoke of tracks on, the direct, road to Piney Chapel till they turned off?, A. No; they took the ulrect road, coming out by the doctor's house, till they came to the wall, with this exception; the marsh was Cull of holes and bad places, and I remember thinking they had got lost, as they went from right to left, and ¦kept changing1 oh that way till they lost the general SirectionJ CJ. Didyou say that the Doctor said to you that he Had heard of the assassinatiop ofthe President on Saturday evening or on $un4ay? A- My impression is that be said not till Saturday afternoon or Sunday morning. ... ., „ , ¦ CJ. You think he said Saturday evening? A. Yes. CJ. Did he mention how and whence he heard it? A. No sir; I can'tsay that he did, but I have an indistinct Idea that be heard it at the town, but am notsure; over mBryantown. ; 'd he describe the dress ofthe younger man? A. I don't remember his saying anything about it. CJ. Did he describe bis height and general appear- anceJ A. Hesaid he was asmooth-la,ced young man, about sevejiteen.or eighteen. CJ. Did he tell you the direction they took, and did you, search for tracks in the direction indicated, and if snudjdypu find any? A. Yes, we found tracks, but othe* teams were constantly passing, and the road fa not much traveled. < i> CJ. Didyou go on Tuesday across the swamp? A. Yey, we went ail through the- swamp on Tuesday and Friday ,,after wecame hack. CJ. Were you one of the party who went to see Mr. Wilmer's house? A. Yes sir. CJ. Whattimedidyougetthere? A. Thursday orTues- day night; I think it was late in the evening when we got there. . . CJ. What time did you.say you got to Winner's? A, I think it was Wednesday, evening. CJ. Did yoU hear anything of them on the road? A. I .did not- CJ. This was before the doctor was carried to Bryan- town? a. Yessir. . » - i , . CJ.-Were you and Mr. Lloyd under Lieutenant Lo vett1 s orders? A. I was acting under Major O'Beirne's orders, but in his absence was under. Lieutenant Lo vett, who ha,d charge of tbesquad, I suppose. CJ. Was Mr. Lloyd with you? A. Yessir. CJ. Were you in the Court when his testimony was read? A. I was not. The Court here took a recess. ¦On the Court reassembling the testimony was con tinued. Testimony of Simon Gavasan. -j'iJ/.Win you state whether you are acquainted with Dr. Mudd? A. Yes sir. ¦ " CJ. Were you not at his house the Tuesday following the assassination? A. Yes^sir, I was. CJ. State what-" inquiries you made xif him there to aid you in tbe pursuit of the murderers, and what re- plies'bemade? A. We wCntthereonthe forenoon of that Tuesday, the 18th; we went to his house, and we made inquiries whether any two men "had passed there oh the,morningbfSaturda5r, after 'the assassina tion; he said "no," aud then, when, we asked .more particularly 'whether two men came, one of them having his leg fractured, he said '-yes;" We asked him. what time, and he said, "at four or half-past four in the morning they rapped at his door; and he being alarmed at the noise came down and let them in; he said another man' assisted the'injured mail into the house; he.said he attended to thefractureas well as be could, but tbat he had nbt much fracture; the person with the fractured leg stayed inithe parlor at first, but -after that was taken up to one of the rooms up stairs; and remained there till between three and five o'clock in the afternoon on Saturday; he said they then left there, and he went Eartof the Way With them, but that previous to tbat e went to look' for a buggy, with the other man, to have the wounded rhan taken away.but that he could not find one: hesaid he1 went part of the way on the road with them, but theysfirst-- inquired the way to Aflen's Fresh, and that they also Inquired the way to Dr. Witmer's; and he saidfie shOwedthem-the roads. Q. Did yod'ask him whether he knew these persons? A. Hesaidatflrst"No,notatall." CJ, On the subsequent days did you have any inter view with him, and if so when? A. On Friday, the 21st. ' i ,¦¦'.''.' - Q. State what occurred then? A. We went there to arrest him and search his house. Hewas not in, but his wife sent for him; whenhecamewe informed bim, that we would have to search his house; his wife then went up stairs and brought a boot down; we examined the boot and found -"JiWilkes" marked on the leg of tbe boot. She also brought a razor down, which one ofthe party took incharge. Q. Did you repeat your inquiry as to who they were? A. We asked^ bim if it was not Booth? he said he thought not. Q. Did you pet any reason for hiaL SO thinking? A, He said he bad whiskers on, and also had his mous tache shaved off; probably he shaved it off up stairs. .Q. Did he speak of Waving known him before? A, Yes; when we made inquiries he said hewasintrd- duced last fail by a man named Thompson. Cross-examination by Mr. -Ewing. —Q. Who was the ch,ief of the party who were with you? A. We had no chief. TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. loll ^S1 COL. LAFAYETTE C BAKEK, (4) TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 57 CJ. Who was in charge of tbe party? A. Lieutenant Lovett came in charge of a cavalry. detachment, but wj went under the orders of Major O'Beirne. Q. In the absonce of Major O'Beirne, were yon not under the order of Lieutenant Lovett?. A. Yes sir, partly. CJ. Who commenced the conversation with Mudd on Tuesday? A. That I am not able to say. Q. How long did the conversation last? A. Probably one hour. > CJ. I n your presence? A. Yes sir. CJ. Did not Lieutenant Lovett conduct the inquiries chiefly? A. No sir; the doctor was asked questions by all of us. CJ. DItHiot Dr. Mudd himself bring tbe boot down to you? A. No sir; his wile brought it down. CJ. Who was it given to? A. The one nearest the duor. CJ. Didyou. in point of fact, make a search ofthe house? A,- We did not go up stairs: when we found the boot and razor we considered it satisiactory evi- denco that Booth and Harold had been in the house. . Q. Didyou go to meet Mudd on Friday as hewas go ing to the house? A. No s\r. d. Did Lieutenant Lovett? A. There might have been one or two other officers; I^im not sure. CJ. Did you ask him on Tuesday for a description of the, party? A. No sir; I believe the photograph of Booth was shown to himand that he did not recognize it as one oi' the partiesthat was at his house, but that there was something about the forehead and eyes that resembled oneof them. Q. Did he point out to you the road they went across the swamp? A. No sir, he eaid he bad made inquiries how they would get to tbe Be v. Dr. Wilmer's. ; CJ. He mentioned that on Tuesday? A. Yessir. CJ. Did he tell you how to get to Dr. Wilmer's? A. " Yes sir. Testimony of Mrs. Emma Offu&t. CJ. State whether or not you are the sister-iU-law of John Floyd? A. Yes sir. Q. Staie whether or not, on the Tuesday, the 11th of April, you were at his house? A. Yes sir. (J-.You saw Mr. Floyd on tbat day? A. Yes sir, I was in tbe carriage with Mr. Floyd. CJ. On that occasion did you happen to meet Mrs. Surratt? A. Ye3sir. , CJ; .State to the Court where the meeting took place? A. Somewhere near TJniontown. Q. state whether or not a conversation tobk place between Mr. Floyd and Mrs. Surratt on that day? A. Yes, they talked together. CJ. Did you hear any of the conversation? A. Yes sir, some of it. CJ. Under what circumstances did the conversation take place? A. Our carriages passed each other before we recognized who it was. aud Mr. Floyd went out to her carnage, aud they had a conversation /which took place at her carriage, and not at ours. CJ. Were yon at Mr. Floyd's again on Friday, the 14th of April? A. Yes sir. Q. State whether you saw the prisoner, Mrs. Surratt, there? A. Yessir." > Q. Did you observe anv conversation between her and Mr. Floyd on that day? A. Yes: I saw them talk ing together, but I did not hear them at all; I had oc casion to go to tbe hack part of thehouse. CJ. Did the conversation take place in tbe back part of the house or m the yard? A. In the yard, sir. CJ. Had Mr. Floyd been to town tbat day? A. No sir, he had been to Marlbdrough, attending court. Q. What did he bring with him when he came back? A. Some oysters and iish, and that is how he came to drive into the back partor tbe yard. CJ. Was any oneeise in the yard at the time of this conversation? A. No sir. Cross-examination by Mr. Aiken.— CJ. How far apart were the two carriages when you went past each other? A. Two cr three yards; 1 think they talked but a very few minutes together. CJ. Did Mr. Floyd state what the conversation was? A. No sir. Q. Nor what the conversation on the 14th was about? A. No; he did not. Q. Have you been acquainted with Mrs. Surratt for sometime? A- Eversince last summer, I believe, ¦' CJ. What time did she arrive at Mr. Floyd's on the 14th? A. At about 4 o'clock, I think ' Q. Did you hear any conversation with her previous to Mr. iFloyd's coming home? A. Yes sir; in the parlor. CJ. Did you learn what tbe conversation was ou that day? ' • CJuestion objected to and waived. ¦ Q,. Did Floyo, make any statement in reference to his business with Mrs. Surratt? A.. No sir. Q. Did Mrs. Sui'.att have any business with you on tbat day? A. Nq'sir. , , , „ Q. Did Mrs. Surratt place in your hands any pack age?! A. No sir. CJ During your' visit tb Mr. Floyd's did youhearany- thing about shooting irons? ," : ¦ Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham objected, and the objection waa sustained by tbe Court. Testimony of William P. Je1>b- Q. Look at the prisoners and see if you recognize any or all of them? A. Only one of them, sir. CJ Which1 one? A. Harold. Q. Stale when you first saw him? A. Since the 25th of last October I have been in Caroline county, Mary land, as cdmmissary agent in the Confederate service: I was in the cavalry service, but was wounded on the 9th of January, aud alter that was appointed commis sary agent; when I was on my way, in April, to Fau quier couflty I got down to Port Conway and saw a wagon on the wharf. Q. When was that? A. On the 18th of April. CJ, The Monday after the assassination? A. No sir: the Monday week after the murder; there were three of us together; we saw the wagon arid rode down on the wharf, and before we reached the wagon we saw a man get out bf it'ahd it seemed to us as if he put his hand into his bosom; I don't remember whether we hailed the ferry or not; this one man got out of the wagon and came where we were and said:—' What command do you belong to?" Buggies said Moseby's. command; then he said, "Where, are you going?" I said, "It is a secret; where are you going?" Q. Did you ask .him what command he belonged to? A. He said he belonged to A. P. Hill's Corps. He said his brother was wounded below Petersburg, and asked if we would take him down to tbe lines. Harold asked us then to take a drink, but none of us drank, and we declined. I got down and carried out three horses and tied them up, and Harold came and touched me, and said he wanted to speak to me, and said. ''I suppose you are raising a command to go South:" and then said be would like to go with us. I said that I coUld go with no man that I didn't know anything about, and then he made this remark:— "We are1 the assassinators of the President." I was so shocked- that I did not know what to say, and I made no reply. Lieutenant Buggies was near by, watering his horse; and I called to him; he came there, and thenBooth came'iip and Harold introduced him; after introducing himself Booth badamark upon his hand, I remember, J. W. B.; we went across theriver* Booth ridingon Buggies' horse, and he said he wanted to pass under the name of Boyd; we went to a lady's house, and I asked her if shecould take in a wounded soldier; she at first consented, and then said she could not; we then went up to Mr. Garrett's, where we left Booth; Harold and the rest of us went on within a few miles of Bowling Green; the next day Harold re turned towards Garrett's, and that was thelast I saw of him till alter he was captured. CJ. Did I understand you that Booth went alone to Garrett's? A. No sir; Buggies, Booth, Bainbridge and I rode up to Garrett's and we left Booth there and Ha rold came on with us to Bowling Green and bad dinner. CJ. Doyou know where Harold went to from Bow ling Green ? A. No sir; he left us the next day at two or three o'clock. Q. Now when you saw him on Wednesday morning he was in custody then? A. Yessir. CJ. Before he said to you "we are the assassinators of the President," had you told him you were in tbe Con federate service? A. Why ne could see that, because we were in Confederate uniform. Cross-examined by Mr. Stone.— Harold wanted you to aid him in going further South? A. Yes; butwehadno facilities to aid him. CJ. Did beseem disappointed? A. Yessir. Q. Was Booth present when you were talking with Harold about their being the assassinators of the Presi dent? A. Not when he first fold me; heandBainbridge came up after. Q. Did he seem to be much agitated? A. Yes sir. CJ. What did Booth say? A. He said "I didn't In tend telling that." CJ. But Harold did tell ? A. Yes, he had told before Booth came up. CJ. Can yoii recollect whether he said that he had killed the President? A. No; he said, "We are the assassinators ofthe President;" then a few moments afterwards he said, " Yes, he is the man, J. Wilkes Booth, who killed the President." By Mr. Aiken.— CJ. Have you ever taken the oath of allegiance ? A. No, sir; but I am perfectly willing to do so. Testimony liient.-Colonel €. J. Congers, By Judge Holt— CJ. State to the Court whether you and others were engaged in the pursuit of the mur derers of the Prfesident. If so, please take up the narrative at the point where you me*, tbe Confede rate soldier Jebb, who has given his evidence, and state what occurred afterwards. A. I found him in a room inthe hotel in Bowling Green, in bed; I expected to find somebody else; as I went in he" began to get out of bed; I said, " Is that you, Jebb7" hesaid, "Yes;" I said, "Getup.Iwant you;" hegot up, and I told him to put on his clothes, and come into tbe part of the room where- 1 was; I said to him, "Where are the two men who came with you across: the river at Port Royal?" there were two men 'in the, room with me; Jebb said tome, "can I see you alone;" I said yes, and Lieuts. Baker and Doberty wentoutof the room. He reached out his hand to me and said, "I know who - you want, and I can tell you where they are now; they, 58 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. are on the road to Port Royal, about three miles from here- at the bouse of Mr. Garrett, and if I show you where they are now you can get them; I said "have you a hor.-e?" he replied hp had'; I told him l.had just comefrom there, and toe seemed lor a moment to be considerably embarrassed; be said bethought we came from Richmond, but if we had passed by Garrett's he could not tell me whether the men were there or not; I toldhimitdid not make any difference, we could go back and see; he got out his horse and we started; just before we gdt to the bppse Jebb, who was riding with, me, said *'we are near ' where we go through a gate, let us stop here and , loqk round;'' I rode, in the first place, alone, to fipd the gale, about as, far as I understood him to, say it was, but did not see any open ing;, there wa-. a hedge, or rather a bushy fence that side.of the road; I turned round and went back, and told him I did not see i..ny gate in that direction; we then. rode on some three hundred yards further and stopped again; Jebb went with Jjieuteuant Baker, and myself to find the gate; I sent Lieutenant Baker on to , the gate while ,1 went back myself for the cavalry; we ¦returned rapidly, and a guard was stationed round the building: when, I went to the house Lieutenant Baker was telling some one to strike alight and come out; I think the door was open when I got there; Lb. e first individual I saw when I got there, whose name was said to have been Garrett; I said to him, "Where are the men who stopped at your house?" "They have gone." "Gone where?'' "Gpne to the woods.'' "Wher- aboutsinthe woods have they gone?" he then com mencedto tell me that they came there without his consent, and that he did not want them to.stay: I s,aid, VI don't want, any long stories from you, I just w*iot to know where those men have gone?" he com menced to tell me over again the same thing, and I turned to one ofthe ,men a^d -told him, to bring me a lariat, and threatened jto hang the man to a locust tree because he did hot tell me what he, knew: one of his sons then came in and said. don't hurt the ola man, he is scared; I will .tell you where these men are; I said that is what I want; he said they are in the barn, and assoon as I got there I heard somebody walking about. on the hav; I stationed men around the birn, and Lieutenant Baker said to one of the young.Garretts (there had two ot them ap peared by this time) ''you must go in the barn and get the arms from* that man;" I think he made^omeob- jeotion to going in, and Bilker said, "They know you, and you must go ins" Baker then s.iid to the men in side that one of the men with whom they had bsen Stopping was coming in to. get their arms and they must deliver them up: Garrett went in„but came out very soon and said, "TMs man says, ' you, you have betrayed me,' and threatened to shoot me";" I asked him how he knew the man was going to shoot liim; hesaid, "He reached down in, the hay and got the 're volvers;'1 I directed Baker then to tell the men inside that. they were to come outand deliver themselves up. and that if they did not in five minute ; we would set the barn on fire: Booth said. "Wl'o are- vpu? what do you want?'? Lieutenant Baker answered, .'¦ We want yout we know who you- ore; give up your arms. and come out; Booth replied, "Give um a .little time to consider;"" : Baker^said,. "Very well," and some tea or fifteen minutes elapsed, probably, before anything further was said, when Booth, again asked, "Who are- you? .wh'.it .do yon want?"' I said, to Baker, do ;not-by any possible intimation or remark Itrt him know who we are; ii'hec.iooses to lake us lor Rebels- or friends wewill take, advantage of it; we will not lie to him about it, but wc wi'U not iiu&wer, any .questions oh that subject; saoapiy insist on hi -fcom- ingoutiif ho will; Baker replied to Booth, "Xt don't make any difference who we are. we. know who you- are awd'we want y6u:V Booth said. 'This ishird.be- cause it may be I am to be taken by my friends;" some liime dunftg the - conVeriuti'on Booth said, "Captain, I know you to be a brave man. and I believe you to bo honor .ble; I have got but one-leg; I am a cripnle; if you will withdraw your nae-i 100 yards from the door I will come out aftd light you:" Lieuten ant Baker replied, ".we did not come hereto' fight, we simwly come lo-rnakeyou-jDrjsDner^" once after that he said, "if you will lake your men 50 yards from the door I will come out and fight; give me a chance for my Tire:" there was the samcreply, and with nmn^ulariv' theatrical voice, Booth called out, "well, my brave boys, you may prepare u- stretcher for me;'! I requested- one of theOarre'.cs to pile some pine boughs againsL the barn; he soon ca-mo to meand said, "this man says if I put any more hrusti up there lie willputziba 1 through me;"saidT.'-vory'well1you need not goilitaqre any more;" Alter a while Bootfxsaid;— ''There is a man here who wants to come out;" Lieutenant Baker said '-"Very well: let him take his arms and como oat;" some talk passed between them in the. barn; one of the expres sions I heard Bo nth use to Harold .was, "You . coward, will you leave me nriw?butj,TO, go I would not have you stay with me:" further words ensued between them, which I supposed had re'erence to-bringing out the arms, which was one off the conditions on which Harold was directed to come otat; what the words were was not hoard; he came to the clonr and said, "Get me out:" Lieutenant Baker says to him, "'Haiad out your I arms;" the . reply was. "I have none;" Baker said, if You carried the carbine; you must hand it out;" Booth replied. "The arms are mine, I have get them" Baker said, ''This man carried the carbine. and must bring it out;" Booth said, "Upon the word and honor of a gentleman the arms are mine; I have , got them;" Tj told Baker to never mind the. arms, but let this man out; Harold put out his hands, and Lieut. Baker took hold of him and brought him outiand passed him to the rear; I then went around the barn,, pulled some straw out and twisted a little rope, as big as yourfinger, and fired it and stuck it back; it seemed to be loose, broken hay4 that had been taken up front. the barn floor; it blazed very rapidly, and lit up tha, barn at once: I looked through oneof the cracks, and just then heard something drop on the floor, which! supposed tobe Booth's crutch. .. When I first noticed him his. back was towards me; he was looking towards the front door; he then came back within five ieet ofthe corner of thebarn; theonly thing I policed he had in his hand when he came was a carbine; he laised thecarbineto his breast'and- looked' along the cracks rapidly; he then looked 'at the fire and from the expression ot his face I am satisfied he looked to see ii lie could put it out, but he could not, it was burping too rapidly; I started to go round to the front of the barn again, and when- 1 was about half around I heard the report of a pistol; I went on around to the door, wept in and found Lieutenant Baker look ing at him, and' rather holding Or raising him up; I said lie bad shot himself; Baker said he had not; I? asked where he was shot; we raised Mm up and the blood ran but oi'bfs wound; I then said "Yes, he has shot himself." Lieutenant Baker replied very earnestly he had not. I said, tliat we, must carry him out or this will soon be burning us:' we took him up and carried him out on the grass, a little way from tbe door beneath a locust tree; I went back into the barn to see If tbe fire could be put out and returned to where he was lying; before this I supposed him to be dead; he had all the appear ances ot!a dead man, but when1 I came back his eyes and mouth were moving; I called immediately for Water, and put some On his face: he seemed -to revive and attempted to speak; I put my ear down to hia mouth and heard him say, "Tell my mother I oied tor mv pountry;" I repeated the, words to him and said, ",Is that What ybu would say?" hesaid "Yes;" they carried him to the porch of Garrett's house and lain him on a straw bed or tick; at that time be had re vived cpnsiderably, and could talk in a whisper so as to be intelligibly understood. He could' hot speak above a whisper; be wanted water; 1 gave it to him: he, wanted to turn on his fac# I said he could hot lie on his face:' he \Vanted to be turned, on bis side; we turned hirn on his side three times, but lie could not lie with any comfort and asked immediately tobe turned back: he asked me to put my hand on his throat and press ddwn, which I did; he said "harder:" I pressed as hard as I thought neces sary: he made a very strong exertion to cough, but was unable to do so; I supposed he thought there was blood in bjs throat; I asked him to put out bis tongue, which he aid; I said, there 'is no'bloodin your throat: he repeated several times, two or three times' at least. '¦ Kill me, kill me;" I replied, " I do not want to kill • you; I wantjyou to get well;" I then tpofc what things he had in bis pocket and tied them up in a paper; I had previously sent for a physician, who came there to see him; he was not then quite-dead; he would once, perhaps, in five minutes gasp; his pulse would almost die out, a»d then there would be a slight motion again; I lelt him, with the prisoner Harold, in charge of Liouteuant Baker, saying that if Booth revived again to wait an hour, apd if Jfkeljfto recover to send over to Belle Plain for a surgeon from one of the gun ships) if not, to get tbe best conveyance he could and bring him over, dead or alive. Q. Ybuleftbeforebed'ed. A. No; I stayed theresome ten minutes after that the doctor who was there said he was dead. Qv You have seen tbe dead body since? A. Yes. "Ml At this point the knife, belt, cartridge-box, pistols, pocket compass, and carbine. In possession of* Booth when he was killed, were produced in Court, and iden tified \>y the witness. Q. Is that what is called a Spencer rifle? A Yes. It is a Spencer rifle or carbine. It is a cavalrv weapon. It has that mark on the breech of it. Q, Werethese arms loaded? A. Yes, the pistols were loaded when brought into Secretary Stapton's office; I unloaded this carbine myself: I did not Count the num bered, bulls tn it; there was one In the barrel and the chamber was full; the chamber was bent; some one had tried to unload it previously, and I was called to get it out. A spur and file was»also exhibited to the witness, and be was nsked if lie cpuld identity them? Witness. -That file was taken out of Booth's pbeket; the .spur is like the one he had on, but I could' not identify it as the same spur. ' - . Witness then examined and identified the bill of ex change iound on the person of Booth. Q. In what State and county did this occur? A 1 think it is in Caroline qounty, State of Virginia, three TEJAL OF. THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON: 59 miles south of Port Royal, on the road to Bowling Green. Q. Do you recognize the prisoner Harold as the one you took cut of the barn? A. I do. s!im»ony of John Fletcher. Examined by Judge Holt.— (instate your business"? A. I am the foreman ofthe Naylof's livery stable. Q. Doyou knoiv the prisoner Atze^rp'th? A. Yes. Q. State whether or not you se,ep him aboutthe third of April last? A. Yes; he came to the stable at tbat time, between six and seven o'clock, with another gentleman apd two horses; ,they said they wanted to put up their horses there; I ordered their horses down into the stable; .the other gentle man who was with Atzeroth, told me he was going to Philadelphia, .and that he would leave these horses in Atzeroth's care to sell; I have never seenrthat mail since we kept the horses at the stable, apd sold one of them to a Mr. Thompson, a stage con tractor. We kept the brown horse at the stable until the 12th ofthe month, when Atzeroth took him away I didn't see him again until one o'qlbck on the 14th o* April; he came in then with a dark bay mare; If asked him what he had done with the roan horse; he said' he sold him in Montgomery county, and that he had' bought this mare, saddle and bridle; be wished me to pet the mare, which I did. Q. State the character of the horsehe saidhe had Scld; was one eye b ind? A .Yes; be was a very heavy common Work hpide, blind IP one «ye; ^ dark brown horse; heavy tail aud mane; very heavy feet; I went to supper at G*A o'clock pn the idth,. and when I came back, the colored boys had the mare saddled and bri dled; be paid the colored boy fifty cents for tbe keeping: and said "Was that right?" I said "Yes;" he asked how much I would charge if he stayed till morn ing; I said' fifty cents more; bewentout and stayed three-quarters of an hour, and returned with thesame mare; "fietald me not to take tbe saddle and bridle off tbe mare, and asked if I could keep the stable open for bim till ten o'clock; I told him yes, I should be there myself; at ten o'clock hecame alter the mare; he asked me if I would have a. drink with him; I told him, I had po Objection: we went' down to the Union Hotel, corner of Thirteen-and-a-half street andEstre.et, and took a drink; we returned to the stable, and he said tp me, ''If this thing happens to-night you will hear of a present." It seemed to me he was about half tight, afia rpaid no attention to him; he mounted the mare; I remarked tbat I would not like to ride that mare, that she looked too skittish like; be said she is good upon a retreat; I s^poke to him ofthe other' man, meaning, Ha rold, staying out very late with the other horse; oh! he says he will be back after awhile; I watched him until be wept down E St., past Thirteep-and-a-half st., and I fol lowed him doWn until I saw him go' into the Kirkwpod House; ,1 watched bim until Joe icaime put, mounted the mare again, went along D street, add turned up Tenth. when I returned to the stable agam; I did not go to the 60 TRIAL OF THE* ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. office; I was thinking about his living so far off, and of the horse Harold had;, I had suspicions tbat he was npt going to bring the horse hack; I went across Estreet a^ain. and' went up Fourteenth street and came on Pennsylvania avenue again, towards Willard's; I saw Harold ridin? the horse; I hailed him: the horse was going towards the stable; I started towards him to take the horse from him; I suspect that he saw me by the gaslight and knew me. for he began t^move the horse away a little;' I said " You get off tbat horse now, you have had that horse long enough;" he put spurs into the horsfc and went up Fourteenrh sTeet; Ikept sight of him' until he had gone up Fourteenth street as far as F street; I then returned to tbe stable and saddled a horse for myself; I went along the avenue, passed down E street, and turned down Ninth to Pennsylvania avenue again; I went along the avenue, and past the south side ofthe Capitol; I met a gentleman coming down,' and asked him did by see any man riding on horseback; he told meyes.besaw two:tbatthey weregblng very last; I followed on till I came to the Navy Yard Bridge: the guard there halted me and called for the Sergeant ot the guard: I asked him if tb's man had passed, giving a 'description ofthe man, horse, saddle,, and brid:e; he said yes, he had gone across the bridge, that he waited a little for an acquaintance, but aftera while went on; that another one came up riding a bay horse: Tasked him if the- first one .gave his name, he said yes. Smith; I asked tbe Sergeant if I could crdss the bridge; be said yes, but I could not get back; I said I would not go over so, and I turned round and came back to the city again ; I looked at my watch when I had got back to Third street, and it was ten minutes East 12; I rode rapidly dpwn to tbe bridge, but slowly ack; when I got to the stable the fbreman told me th^ President was shot; T put up the horse andsat down outside the office; it was then I o'clock; I beard people passing on the sidewalk say that it was a man who rodeotf on horseback that shot President Lincoln ; I went across E street to Fourteenth, and asked a ser geant if they picked up any horse: he told me he had picked upsPmehprsp, and that I coUldgo down to the police station on Tenth street; I went there and saw a ¦detective by- the name of Charley Stone, who told me thatsome horse had been taken up and taken to General Augur's Head-quarters; we went along together(up to General Augur's office; I gave General Augur Harold's description and age as far as' I could; I told him I had pursued Harold to the Navy Yard bridge; a saddle and bridle were lying quite close to his desk, which I re cognized as the saddle and bridle Atzeroth had on the horse he said he had sold; he asked me what kind of a horse he bad;! described him as, a big brown horse, blind in one eye; I-did not remember the man's name then; Ihad hisriame in the office; hesentthe detective, Charley Stone, down to the office, who brought up the nameandgave it to tbe General. " A saddle and bridle were here brought Into Court, which were identified.by tbe witness as those he recog nized at General Augur's office. Q. Did he call at 10 o'clock precisely? A. Yes. Q. Did he speak about' anything Wonderful tbat night? A. He said if this thing happened I wouldhear of a present. Q. Had he been talking to you of anything before? A. No; but he seemed to be very much excited. Q. When you left the city was he going up Tepth street towards, Ford's Theatre? A. Yes. Q,. You spoke of Harold's having a horse from your stables? A. Yes; he hired bin> on the 14th, about a quarter to ten o'clock, and said he would be after him at four o'clock; he canie alter tbe hor.-se at a quarter past four o'clock; he asked me how much I would charge for the hire of tbe horse; I told bim ?5; be wanted him for $4: 1, told him be coiild not have It for that; he knew this horse'ahd Inquired (for this particu lar one; I told him he might take a mare in the stable, but hesaid he would not take her; he wanted to see the Saddle and bridle; 1 showedhim the'saddle; he said it was too small; I gave him another saddle; that did not suit him; they were not the kind of stirrups he wanted; they were covered with leather; be wanted English steel stirrups; he wanted to see the bridles, and I took him into the olfice and he picked out a double-reined brftjle: before he mounted tbe horse he asked me how late he could stay out; I told him he could not stay later than 8 or 9 o'clock at tbe furthest. Q. At what hour didyou see Harold riding that night? A. About half past ten o'clock: he was crossing down from towards the Treasury on the Avenue; I met him along by Willard's. as he was passing Fourteenth street; when I spoke to him he rode off rapidly. Q. Did he have a fast horse? A. Not very fast; he was a ladies' horse; any one could ride him; hewas gentle and sure. Q. Did he trot or pace? A, He had a single rack. Q. Did he make any reply when you called him? A. Not the slightest. ' Qj You had not then heard of the President's assassi nation? A. Not a word. Q. Have you seen the horse-Harold rode since that time? A. I have not. Q. Did ypu see a saddle and bridle at General Augur's on thePight of the 14th? A. Yes, at, two o'clock that night I did. Q Have'vonsopn tha^ one-eyed horse since? A. N'o. Cross-examined by Mr. Stpne.^Q. At the time Haroid i r'Kd o jew you down in price wa* it when ue called at one or lour o'clock? A. When be engaged the -prSevVbe£eyousaw,him aga,:n at Wi]iard's did the horse seem tobe tired? A. Not very; he, seemed to kind to want to come to tbe stable. Q. How near were you to him, when you first, saw bim? A. Not fifteen yards; he was letting the horse, go slow, then, as if to bring hjm upstanding. Q. Did you call bim by name? A. I did not; it was then about twenty-fi.ve,uiinutcs past ten o'clock. Q. Are you satisfied it was the same man now in the box?tpoi'nting to Harold.) A. Yes, very well satis- Q.' "Were you acquainted with him before? A. The, way Jgotacquainted with Harold was his coming to the stable, about the 5tb or How Jar did you lollow him ? A. I just kept in sight until ne turned -into Tenth street, and I never saw him again until to-day. The witness, by direction of the court, was sent to the stable for, the purpose of identifying the blind horse referred tu in hi& testimony. Testimony of .BoEin Greenawalt. Q. State whether or not you are the keeper ofthe Pennsylvania House in this city? A, I am. Q. Areyou acquainted with the prisoner, Atzerotn? A. I am. Q. Were you not acquainted with J. Wilkes Booth? A. I was not well acquainted with him; he came to the house. (A photograph was exhibited to the wit ness which he recognized as thatot Booth.) Q. State whether or not the man Booth had frequent interviews with Atzerothat the Penusylvauia House? A. He bad; AtreroUi would generally sit in the sitiiug room, and Bop'h. would walk into thehall and then out again, 'followed by Atzeroth; Booth .seldom entered tbe room; they had interviews in front of my house, and they would o i ten walk off as far as the livery sta ble, where their conversation would takeplace, Q, Did you at anytime hear the prisoner Atzeroth speak of expecting to hav(y plenty ol gold 30p.n? If so, state what you beard. A. He and s.ome other, young men whom he me: came into my house. He* had boeji drinking, and. said, "Greenavvalt, I am prettv near broke, though I have friends enough to give* me as. much money as wrtl keep me all my life. I am going away one of these days, but I will return with as much god as. will keep me all my, lifetime." Q. When was it he. made tbat declaration? A. I think it was about the fir*t cf April. He came to my huuse, 1 think, on the 18th of March last. Q. ytate how long before the assassination he left your bouse. A. J think it was on the previous Wed nesday morning. Q. Had ho any baggage with him? A. No sir. Q. State when you next saw him? A. I next saw TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON". 61 Mm on Saturday morning, the 15th of April, between two and three o'clock. ^LDJ3h®^°me into your house, and ask for a room at that hour? A. I had just come hi to thefiouse^Lnd gone to my room, when a servant came to get change for an Ve dollar bill, and told me there was a man by the name of Ataeroth down stairs who wanted lodging; Iwfent down, and found Atzeroth andaPother man there. Q. Did the two men take a room together? A. Yes sir; Atzeroth asked for bis old room; I tbld him it was occupied, and that he would have to room with the other gentleman, whom I requested to go to his room with the servant; Atzeroth was going to follow him, and I said "Atzeroth, you have not registered;" hesaid, "Do you want my name?" and appeared to hesitate t he finally went back and. registered his name. Q. Will you describe the appearance ofthe man who was, with him? A. He was a man about five feet seven and a half or eight inches in height, and about one huudred and ninety pounds weight; of a dark, weather-beaten complexion; and dressed poorly, bis pants being worn through. Q. Had he the appearance of a laboring man? A. Yes Bir. Q. Could you express an opinion as to whether the clothing worn by him were such as he probably ordi narily wore, or were assumed by him as a disguise? A. I guess they were more of a disguise; be had on a broadcloth coat which had been much worn; his whole appearance was shabby. - Q. What namedid he give? A. I believe it was Sam Thomas. Q. What became of him? A. He got up, I believe, about- five o'clock the next morning, and left the house; a lady stopping at the house desired to leave in the 6T5 train, and 1 gave orders to a servant to that effect; she leit before I got up, and as she was going out ofthe door this man Thomas went out and asked the way to the railroad; he had no baggage. CJ. Did Atzeroth remain? A. He left shortly after wards, making towards Sixth street westwardly. Q. How long afterwards? A. When theservant was returning he met Atzeroth ana said to him, " .itzeroth, what brings you out so early in the morning?" "Well," said he, *' I have business." CJ. Hadhe paid his bill? A. No sir; I did not see him again. Q. Do you recognize him among these prisoners? A. Ido. CJ. Did you observe any thing unusual in the conduct Of these men when they first came? A, Nosir; the man Thomas stared at me somewhat; he kept a close eye upon me. Q, Did they have any conversation in your presence? A. No sir. * , CJ. Which of them asked for a room? A. Thomas asked for a room for himself; as I came in Atzeroth was lying on a settee and Thomas standing at the counter. Q. Do you know the prisoner O'Laughlin? A. No sir. Q. Did Thomas make any remark to you? A. All he said to me was that he was a poor writer. Q. Were either of the parties armed? A. I did not notice; I beard It said that Atzeroth had a knife. Q. Had Atzeroth on'any previous occasion hesitated to enter his name on the register ? A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever see him armed? A. In March. I think, it must have been, I saw him have a revolver, which he had just bought; he came in there and made tbe remark that be had just bought it; I told him I wished I had known that be was going to buy such an article, as I had a small one which I would have sold to .him. CJ. Do you think you would recognize the revolver which was in his possession? A. I think! would. • A revolver was then exhibited to the witness which he described as being somewhat similar to the one shown him by Atzeroth, though he could not say that it was the same one. * Cross-examined by Mr. Dosler:— CJ; State on what day before the Mth of April Atzeroth left your house? A. Itwas on tbe lath, I think. CJ: How long did he stay at your house on that occa sion? A. From tbe 18th of March until the 12th of April; during that time he was away but once, when he stayed out one night; he told me he had gone to the ¦country with a man bythe name of Bailey. CJ. What were the arms which you havestated that ypu saw in the possession of Atzeroth? A. A large re volver, something similar to that one; other persons say that he bad a knife, but I never saw him with one. ¦ In -reply to several other questions the witness stated tbat he did not remember having made or hav ing beard any remark preliminary to that of Atzeroth with respect to his expectation of having gold or silver enough to keep him all his lite; tbe man Thomas, who came to the hotel on the morning ofthe 15th with Atzeroth.did not seem to be intimate with the prisoner, though be judged them tobe acquaintances; Atzeroth did not refuse to put his name on tbe register, nor did he say tbat he would not like to do it; . he did not seem sleepv or in liquor. The witness having been asked if he could identify the man Thomas from among the prisoners at the bar, pointed out the prisoner Spangler, as having some resemblance to that person. Thomas, however, had a moustache which the prisoner had not, and his hair was longer and his complexion darker. The witness stated that he did not see Atzeroth and his companion enter the house, and therefore could not tell whether they entered together. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q. What induced you to suppose that they came'in together? A. My servant told me so. Q. What kind of a moustache had the man whom you say the prisoner resembles? A. It was black; he had whiskers in front, and wore a dark, slouch hat. By Judge Advocate.— Q. I understand you to say you are certain that you did not see the prisoner, O'Laughlin. at your house? A. I did not; X do not know the man. Q. Did the hair or moustache of the man Thomas appear to be dyed? A. No sir. f CJ. Did not Atzeroth object to this stranger coming, into bis room? A. Nosir. Q. He simply assented i;o it when you told him there was no other, room? A. Yes sir; I told him he would have tgf go with the man Thomas By the Court.— Q. Do you know whether they got up at the same time in the morning? A. I do not. Q. Did they occupy the same bed? A. No sir. CJ.. What day did Atzeroth leave your house before the murder? A. On Wednesday, I think it was; he said to me then, "Greenawalt, I owe you a couple ot days' board; would it make any difference to you whether I pay you now or when I come back;" he added that it would be more con venierit for him to pay when he came back; he allowed he was going to Mont gomery county., Q. Do you know the prisoner with the black mou stache (O'Laughlin)? A, I 'do not. Q. Do you recognize the face of the man Thomas among those of the prisoners at the bar? A. I cannot positively. > . Testimony of John F. Coyle. Q. Are you one ofthe proprietors of the National In telligencer? A. Yes sir. Q.. State to the Court whether you were acquainted with J. Wilkes Booth during his life time? A. I knew bim. CJ. Did you know him intimately? A. Not at all. Q. J. Wilkes Booth, before he died, made this state ment; that on the night beiore the assassination ot the President, he wrote along article and left it with one of the editors ofthe National InteUigencert in which he fully set forth bis reasons for his crime; will you state whether such a paper was received? A. I never heard of any such paper. Q. Are you quite certain tbat no Buch paper was ever received at the office? A. Not that I ever heard of. Testimony of Hezekiah. Met ts. By Judge Hoft.— Q. Where do you reside? A. In Montgomery county, Maryland. CJ. State whether you ever met the prisoner, Atze roth, and if so, where and under what circumstances ? A. 1 recognize the prisoner at the bar; on the Sunday after theUeath of Mr. Lincoln be was atmy house and ate his dinner there; he was just from Washington and was inquiring about the news; some conversation took place about General Grant having been shot and we understood that he' had been shot in the cars; he then said that "if the man that was to have followed him, had followed him^ it would have been done;" I so understood him. Q. Did he speak of theassassination ofthe President? A. Not that I recolleot; I have no recollection of any thing further. Q. How far is your residence from Washington? A. About twenty-two miles. Q. Did he represent himself as having come from Washington? A. Yessir. CJ. Did he speak at all of the assassination which had just occurred here? A. I don't recollect; the con versation turned on General Grant. Q. Did you make any inquiry after he made that statement? - A. No, not at the time; we talked about the matter after be leit. CJ. Did his manner seem excited? A. I couldnotsay that itwas. Q. Where did he say he was going? A. He did not say. Q. By what name did he call himself? A. He passed in the neighborhood under the name of Andrew At- Wood. - Cross-examined by Mr. Doster.— CJ. What ¦ Is your business? A. Farming. CJ. How 16ng had you known Atzeroth before the visit you have spoken of? A,. I think it is between two and three years since I first got acquainted with him in that neighborhood; I merely knew him by sight; I do not recollect that I ever saw him but once before the Sunday he came there. Q. You say he went by the name of Andrew Atwood around that vicinity? Ai Yes sir, that is the name I knew bim by. CJ. At what time ofthe day did Atzeroth arrive, and how long did he stay? A. He came, I suppose, between 62 TRIAIt OF THE /ASSASSINS AT^ WASHINGTON: 1Q and 11 o'clock; I suppose he-staryed spme twp,o? three hours, , . CJ. Did he recognize ypu as apold acquaintance? A. He knew me. CJ. Did you. speak about the murder? A. I do not re collect sayipg apyfhipg about the assassination. Q. Was anybody else present and talking with ypu when he made- the remark* abput, sonpebody following- General Grant?,,, A., Yes, 8,11% there were a couple pf young men; we we're all in the room together; I was about, threejy^rdsfjom^tzeroih, when he, made the re mark. ,i CJ., Was not this the-answer— "that a, man must have followed General Grant to kill him?" A., No, sir, it was pot spoken in that way; it was, that if the man who was to have followed him had done so, General Grant would have been killedl In. reply t,o a question by the Court the witness stated that the yPung men present at the time of the grison- e.t>'s.renaark,.given;.a3Doye, were brothers by the name of Lemmohi who resided in the peighborhood. Testimony of Sergeant ii. W. ttemmell. By Judge Holt.— CJ. Do ypu recognize the prisoner Afzerotb. as a' map, whom you ever saw before? A. Yes sir. The witness then detailed the circumstances attend ing the prisoner's arrest, which occurred on the 19th; at the time of hia arrest he denied that his name was. Atwood, and gave another. CJ, Did the prisoner ask why you arrested hjm' ? A. No sir. CJ*, He made no inquiry? A. No, sir; I asked him just before he left Germantown, whether be had left Washington recently: he tPld me he hadPPt; then I asked bini whether he. had not something to do with the murder and he said he had hot. Q., Did, he persist in denying his name? A. Hesaid that.he bad not given a fictitious name. CJ. At what ¦ time did ypu asfe the question as to whether he was connected with the assassination? A. It was betweenseventanjdt eight o!c£pck;,asI,was going to leave Germantown. CJ. You arrested' Mm about; fburo'clock, and tip to seven or eight o'clock he made no inquiry as to the cause of his arrest? A. Nosir; During the-cross-examipatioathe-witness stated that he proceeded in guest ot Atzeroth, in pursuance of orders'from Captaih Townsendjflcxfind a mahby tbe name of" Atwood; witness could not -state positively tbat the name just given by the prisoner was not Atze roth; was certain tbat the prisonerstatecftbat he had not come from Washington. Re-examination,, of John Fleacher. By tbe Judge Advocate— CJ. Since leaving here have you' visited the stable at the corner of Seventeenth a«ad I streets, and examined the horse in regard to. which you testified? A. Yes sir. CJ. Where did you find> the awmai? A. I found him ip. the niiddle of the; Head-quarters stable, Seven teenth and I streets, in the first stall. CJ. Didyou examine him and recognize bim as the horse spoken^ of in your testimony as having been taken from your stable by Atzeroth? A. Yessir; he was blind in the right eye. Testimony of Tbomas Ii. Gardner. By the Judge-Ad vocate,-"Q, Have you or not any knowledge of a dark bay, one-eyed, horse, now in Ge neral Augur's stables, at Seventeenth and I streets, Washington? A. Yes sir. CJ. When dadyoulast.see the animal? A. I saw him on the 8th of this month. CJ. Have you amy knowledge of the horse having been sold by your father, and*, i&so, tp whom? A. He was sold by my uncle, George Gardner, tp a man by the name of Booth, CJ. When? A. Some time in the latter-part of Novem ber last, I think. Q. Do you mean J. Wilkes Booth? Af I do not know the first: name.' CJ. How near is your uncle's residence to that of Dr. Mudd? A. Not over a quarter of a mile away. <& Do'youknow whether Booth purchased the ani mal on, the recommendation of the prisoner, Dr. Mudd? A. I do not. CJ Did he come here alone or with others? A. He came there with the prisoner.Dr. Samuel Mudd. Q. Describe the horse. A, He ia a dark bay horse. and is blind in the right eye. By the Court— Q. Were you at your uncle's when Booth and Mudd came to buy the horse? A. Yes sir. CJ. Did they come in a carriage or on horseback?. A. I think they were onhorseback, Q. Did they both leave together? A. Yessir. CJ. Did Dr. Mudd take any part in the purchase or evince any interest in the matter? A, :frot that I am aware of. Cross-examined by Mr. Stone.— CJ, Where did Booth take the horse? A. At his request I took the horse, D^?t-K . , CJ. He taught you it. did he not? A-. I made no use of it whatever, except on that particular occasion, when I showed itto Mr. Cruikshank. s CJ. That was uot an answertu my question; he taught you the cipher, did he not? A. Well, yesvsir. CJ.'Now^,ccordingto the, best of your recollection,1 how soon was that after his return from Richmond? A. He had returned from New York, and he, did not tell me when he had returned from Richmond, because' it was tbe first and only time I ever saw the man in my life; he was well acquainted with Mrs.Surratt, and his nickname around tbe house was Spencer; he had been at the house a day or day and a half before I met him. CJ. Did he tell yon that that was the cipher used in Richmond? A. Nosir. CJ. You stated that the prisoners were free and un reserved in their conversation while in your presence? A. Tiiey spoke in my presence on general topics, and so on; they neverspoke' to me of their private business, CJ. Do we understand you as stating to the Court that ii? all your conversations with them you never learned, of any intended treasonable act or conspiracy of theirs? A. I never did ; I would have been the last man in the world to have suspected John Surratt, ;my schoolmate add companion, of the murderof the President of the United States. CJ. You state that your suspicious were aroused at one timebysomethiugj^oiisifcwat Mrs. Surratt's-' A My suspicions were arpttSeu by John Surratt, and by this man Payne and Booth coming to the house; my suspicions were again aroused by their frequentpriyate conversations, by seeing Payne and., Surratt with bowie-knives, and byfinding a moustache in my room CJ. Your suspicions were not aroused, then, by the* fact of Surratt haVingfcn three pair of drawers ? A. I thought he Was going to take a long ride in the" coun try, and perhaps hewas going South. CJ. Then , as your suspicions were aroused on all these different occasions, and you had reason io believe that there was something iii-the wind that was improper didyou communicate your suspicions to the War De^ partment? A. My suspicions werenotof a fixed or de finite character; I did not know what they intended to do: I made a confidante of Captain Gleason, ofthe War Department, and told bim that Booth was a secret sympathizer; I mentioned snatches of conversation I had heard; and said to bim, "Captain, what do you thinkoftbis all?" we even talked over wbattbey might possibly beat; .whether they could be bearers of despatches or blockade-runners; at onetime I saw in the papers the capture of President Lincoln freely dis- x cussed, audi said to him, "Captain, do you think any party would attempt to capture tbe President?" He- laughed and hooted adtheidea. TEIAIV0F THE '^ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 65 ypu will see it mentioned; It was merely a casual re mark that I made;, the^e suspicions arose in niy,mind after this horseback ride : I remarked to Captain Glea son that Surratt had comebnc-k.andtolidbim that what they bad been after had failed. . CJ. How came youtoconnect'thematter ofthe cap ture of the President, of which you read In the news paper, with any of these parties? , . The question wasobjec.od to by Judge Bingham as feeing wholly immaterial or irrelevant. The.objection was sustained., Q. Were you on intimate personal relations with the prisoners at tho bar? A. Notmtimatero ations; Imet them merely because ibey boarded at Mrs. Surratt's house; I met Atzeroth and went to the theatre with him; I looked unon him,, as did every one in the house, as a good-hearted countryman. CJ-But you wpre a schoolmate with John Surratt? A. John had beep my companion for seven years. ' CJ. Did you still-profess to be a friend of his when you gave the in ormat on that you did to the War Depart-, ment? A. I was his;friend, but when my suspicions as tp the danger ofthe Government were aroused. I pre ferred the Government to John Surratt: I did not know, what he was contemplating hesaid he was go ing to engage in cotton speculations , and in the oil business. , Q. You did not know what; he was contemplating; why then did ypu forfeit your friendship to him? A. I never lorfeited my friendship;- he forfeited his friendr. ship tp me. Q. How so: by engaging in cotton speculations? A. No,sir; by placing me in the position in which I am now; I think ofthe two I was more a friend to him than he was to me. , By Mr. Ewing.— Q. You spoke of reading a publica tion in tho Tribune, of March I9tb, referring to a plot to capture the President? A. Yes sir. . CJ. Van 'you not, by connecting that circumstance with tbe ride which these parties Wfl in , the, country, fix more definitely the time of thatride-rwhether be fore or after tbe date of that publication? A. I think it was afte.r it; I would alsq state thatlsaw in the Wash- ingtpn Republican a statement concerning a contem plated assassination of President Lincoln, and Surratt once made a remark to me that if he succeeded in his cotton speculation his country would lose bim, forever, and his, name would go down to posterity forever green. , ,, , ,,, |„ Q. You think, then, that this occasipn, when they appeared to have come in from a rlde'in the country, was after March lfith? A. Yessir. , . CJ.. Was your remark to Captain treason, respecting the probable capture of the President, made iuterthe ride? A. Yessir; IsaidtoC'apt. Gleason tbat Surr.-tt's mysterious, incomprehensible business had failed, and I added, ''Let us think over w,hat it could have been;" we mentioned, a variety of, thipgs, even the breaking open of the Old Capitol Prison: I would men tion that after that ride, ray suspicions were not so much aroused as before it, because neither. Payne nor Atzeroth had been at the house since; the only one ofthem who visited was the man Booth. CJ. Have you ever seen the prisoner, Arnold? A. No sir. "' • CJ. Did, you first meat tbe prisoner, Dr. Samuel Mudd, on Seventh street, opposite the Odd Fellows' Hall? A. I did. The witness further testified that Mrs. Surratt lived ln,the house on Bystreet, next to the, corner of Sixth, and that the point on Sevepth street at which he met Dr. Mudd, was not op a direct route from tbcP^nniyl- vania>B;ouse or the National Hotel to Mrs. Surratt's. -Re-Examination of John CJreenawalt. By the Judge Advocate.— CJ. In describing the poorly dressed man who called at your house with Atzeroth onthemorningof the 15th of April, you said that 'his hair was, black, but omitted to state the color of his beard and moustache; state it now? A. Their color was dark. Testimony of James WalSter (Colored.) Bv the Judge Advocate.— Q. State whether or not on the Mth of April last you were living atthePehn- . sylvania House in. this-cityand your business there. A. I was living there; I was twelve months there on the 4th of April last; my business was to make fires, carrytwater, &c. CJ, State whether or not you ever saw the prisoner Ateaerath at tbat house, and under what circumstan ces? A. He came there about 2 o'clock on: .the morn- "ilng ofthe 15th of April, and left between,5 and 6 oleiock In the morning. ¦ ¦ - "-. CJ. Did he come, there on foot., or on, horseback ? A. The first-time he came on horseback, and' I held the horse for him at the door; CJ. What hour was that ? A. It was between 12 and 1 o'clock. I believe. CJ. What did he do while you were holding his horse? A. He went into tbe bar; I do not know what he done there; he came out again, and asked me to get him a piece of switch, which I did, when be rodeoffJ Q D'd you notice whether he had arms with him? A; I did not notice what he had; I did not sfee^any thing. CJ. When he came oack at two o'clock was be on font pr on horseback? a. On foot; I was laying down and ro^o and let him In. Q. Did behave a room? A. He desired to go to No^ 52, 1 told him It was taken Up: he stopped at No. 53. CJ. At what hour did he leave on that morning? A. Betwren five and six o'clock. CJ. Where did you see him at that hour? A. I went foT a hack for' a lady who was going IP tbe 6'15 train, and when I was returning I overtook1 him as he was walking flong slbwly; he made no remark to me. Q» Did you see another man who stopped ihere that night?. A,, He lpft in the morning about four or five minutes before Atzeroth, having stopped in tbe same room: hehad no baggage. Q. Do you remember his aopearance? A. When he came in it was dark, tbe gas bcine: pretty low; .he seemed to have on dark clothes and wore a. slouched hat; he went to his room immediately, having paid for it in advance. Q. Will you look at the prisoners' at the bar and see if anyof them resemble this man? A. I cannot sav sir. The cross-examination of this witness elicited no new points of interest. He testified that the horse used by Atzeroth on the night in question, was ap- Jiarently a small light bay horse; hehad seen Atzeroth iave1 a belt containing a pistol and kni'e some four or five days before tbe assassination, but could not iden tify the weapons. He did not see any weapons on Atzeroth on the night of the 14th or the morning of tbe loth. Atzeroth had no ronversation with the man by whom he was accompanied at the time. Testimony or William CSentlenin. By Judge Holt.— Q. Look at that knife (the knffe supposed td have been thrown away by Atzeroth on the night of tyie assassination) and say if yon ever bad it in your band before? A. Yes. On passing down F street on tbe morning' after the assassination on the south side of the street, between Eighth and. Ninth, I saw a colored man pick up something irprri the gutter about ten feet from me; as I came up Tasked him what itwas and he gave the knife to me; a lady spoke- to me from tbe third story window-, and she saw the knife iuthegutter and sent thecolored roandown to get it; I took it and gave it to the Chief of Police; this was on the Saturday morning ofthe assassination. ' Cross-examined bv Mr. Doster— CJ. What time in the morning? About 6 o'clock. CJ. Whereabouts precisely on F street was it ? A. In front of Creaser's house; it lay as if it had been thrown under the carriage step. ' Testimony of J. S. Mcfl*nail. Bv Judge Holt.— Q. State whether or not you had a conversation with Atzeroth in prisnnin whichhesaid that on the night of the assassination of the President, he bad thrown his knife away in thestree.s of Wash« ington. Question obiected to oy Mr. Doster, on the ground that the coniession ofthe witness was under duress. CJ. Under what circumstances was .the statement madetoyou? A. I received information that he de sired to see me, and I went to see him accordingly; I iound him in a cell in prison in irons. > Mr: Doster argued that the condition of the prisoner wassuchasto intimidate1 him, and to makehis con fession under such circumstances was improper to be given as evidence, and cited many authorities to sus tain his objections. ¦• The witness stated thathewas Provost Marshal-Gen eral of the State of;M»Tyiand, which fact. Atzeroth knew. Witness further stated that a brother-in-law of Atzeroth was on his force and -a brother was tena? porarily on bis force also. i . Both of them repeatedly, desired the witness to see Atzeroth, and hewenttherewith the permission ofthe Secretary of War simply at.their instance. The pri soner was in irons, but had no cover over his face or bead; The objection of tbe Counsel was sustained by the Court, Witness fihen answered the question asked him in the affirmative. <• Cross examined byi Mr. Doster-^CJ.-That was all he said? A. I did not say that. I answered the question, Yes. 'i ¦ ' „ CJ. D:d he describe the knife, or name tbe place where hetbrew itaway? , A. Hesaid he threw it away just above the Hearndon House, which is on the cor ner of Ninth and F streets. CJ. Did he also say where his pistol was? A. He stated that it was at Matthews & Co.'s, Georgetown, in possession ©fa young man named Caldwell. CJ Did he state how he got it there? A. He.saidhe went there and borrowed $10 on the pistol, on Saturday morning, April 15th. - CJ. Did the prisoner mention toyouacertaincoat con taining a pistol andbowie knife^and exchanging it in the Kirk wood House, and if so did he state who it be?- longed to? A. He stated that tbe coat at the hotel be longed to Harold. ¦ < Mr. C. Stone, counsel for Harold, mavery loud voice exclaimed, "I object to that testimony." (Laughter.) 66 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Testimony of Jbientenant W. K. Keen. ^.©y Judge Holt.— Q> Jttd^you pass the night of the 14th of April at the Pennsylvania House, in this city? A. Iydid\ CJ. Did you see Atzeroth at the house that night ? A. Idid. .,..,,,, CJ. Under what circumstances didyou see bim? A. I came into the hotel about 4 o'clock on Saturday morning; he was in bed when I arrived In my room; I asked him whether hehad heard of the murder pf the President, he said yes. and remarked what an awful thing itwas; after that I went to bed, and when I awoke, about 7 o'clock, he was gone. Q. Did you see his arms? A. Notthere;-when he oc cupied room No. 51, 1 saw him have a knife and a re- yolverj - CJ. How.long.before the assassination? A. Ithlnkit. was tbe Sunday before, or the Sunday a week; I wpuld apt be positive: thehewje-knife bad a, sheath. (A knife was shown to witness.) I could not swear that was the knife; but it was a knife about that size. CJ. State under what circumstances you saw , the arms? A. Hewentoutandlefttheknife onthebed; X took it and put it under my pillow; when be came in he asked, "Luke, didyou see my knife;" he said he wanted that, and remarked, "if one fails I will, havetneuther;'' I handed it to him and he went out. CJ. Did he have a pistol? A. Yes, he always carried that around his waist. i Cross-examined by Mr. Doster,— CJ. Did von know the prisoner, Atzeroth, before ,you met him. at the Pennsylvania House? A. Yes sir, CJ. Did you speak about the, assassination of the President immediately on going into the room tbat morning? A.. No; , he was in bed whenlcameritrht opposite, and it was five or ten minutes before I spoke to him, , CJ. Did he say anythipg more than that it was an awful thing? A. I believe that is all. CJ. Was he undressed?, A. He, was In bed: I do not know whether he was undressedor not. : . , CJ; You mention the prisoner calling you Luke, were you on intimate terms with him? A. Yes; that was tbe only name IVver beard him call me. CJ. Did ydu see him after this affair? A* No sir. CJ. When he said that if this failed tbeother would not. what else did -feiesay? A. I do not know; this was a week or ten days before the assassination. CJ. At the time you heard the words had you been drinking with the .prisoner? A. Yes, we had two or three drinks while we were lying in bed.- , CJ, Were these remarks made after these drinks? A. Yes-. M> , . , CJ. What kinds of drinks were these?, A. Whisky cocktails, I believe. CJ. Do youremember anythragelse that was said in thpt interview? A. No; that was about all. Testimony of Washington Briscoe. By Judge Holt.— CJ. On the night ofthe 14th April did yousee the prisoner, Atzeroth, and If so,, at what time? A. I did see him; he got into tbe car at Sixth street, and rode towards-the'Navy Yard; it was between! half-past eleven and twelve o'clock. CJ. What did he say? A. He did not recognize me at all: after awhile I asked>him if he bad heard ofthe news; he saidhe had-; be then asked me to let him sleep in thes^ore with me. ¦ > ¦ CJi Where was your store? A. Down at tbe Na/vy Yard: I told bim I could' not let him sleep there. CJ. What was his manner? A, He seemed tobe ex cited Q. Did he urge you, or seem to be very anxious to sleep with you? A. Yes: he asked me three times. CJ. What became of him?" A. He rode down as far as I did; gotout when I did, and asked me again: the gen tleman with me did not invite him to stop, and of course I had no right to do so. ¦ CJ: How long had you known him? A. Some seven or eight years. - CJ. Did be'then express his determination to go anv- whereeise? Ai He sal# he was going back to what was formerly tbe "Kimrael" House, now the "Penn sylvania" House, inC street. Cross-examined by Mr. Doster.— CJ, Did you notice the precise time when you met Atzeroth that evening? A. No. but I think it was about haiftpast eleven or twelve o'clock. CJ. What time was it when he left you that evening, as near as you can cell? A. Near twelve o'clock; he stopped at tbe corner of J and Garrison streets^ near the Navy Yard towaituntilia car came back. CJ. What was his manner; did he appear to be* dis turbed? A. I Judged from his manner that he Was a little excited. CJ. Had he been drinking?- A. I hardly know; I did Hot notice particularly. Testimony of Rev. Br. W. BT. Ryder. Examined by Judge Holt.— CJ. State your residence- and profession. A. I reside in Chicago, and am a! clergyman. . : < ,'(& State whether you recentlv mader a visit iaato Richmond, and at what time? A. 1 left Chicago oh 'the 9th of April, and arrived in Richmond on the 14th, where I remained till tbe 2lst. Q Wbllo there did you find, in the Capitol the ar chives of the so-called ConfederateStates, and it so, in what condition? A. I did; they were'pretty generally confused, and scattered about on the floor, CJI Did you. In common with others, pick up papers' - from tbe floor?. A. Yes. Q. State whether the paper you now hold In your hand was picked Up in the Capitol at Bichmond under the circumstances you mention? A. Yes; I picked IC up either in the' building or' immediately about the building1, or It was handed to me by some one who picked it up in the rubbish about the room; there were pne or two persons With me'; they Tjrere stooping down, and when-they'found anything of importance they would pickltnp and preserve It; in some instances the orderly who was in attendance would hand me some thing, and I would put it in my pocket; having thus, collected quite.a number of things, they were thrown1 into acommoP receptacle and put into a.box and for warded to Chicago1: this was one ofthe. papers, found- TbepaperTeferrCdto was* read by the Judge Advo cate, as follows :— "Bichmond. Februaryll.l 865.— His Excellency Jef ferson Davis, President C.,S. A:— When Senator John son, ot Missouri, and myself waited upon yon, spme, davs since, in relation to' tbe project of annoying and' ^arraSsing tbe enemy by means of burning their Ship ping, towns, etc., etc.. there were several remarksmade' by you upon the subject that I was not fully prepared to answer, but Which, upon subsequent con fere nee with parties proposing the enterprise, ifind cannot apply as objections to the scheme. First, the combustible ma terial consists of several preparations, and pot one alone, and can be used withoUtexposingtbeparty dsingthem to the least danger Of detection whatever. The preparations are not in tbe hands of Mr. Daniel, butareiritbehands 6f Professor McCullogh, and are known but to him and ope other party, as I Understand. ¦'Second. There is no necessity for sending persons in tbe rnilitnryservicejnto the'eneray's country, but the work may be done oy agents, and in most cases by per sons ignorant of the facts, and. therefore, innocent agents. I have seen enough of the effects that cau be produced to satisfy me that in most cases without any danger to the parties encaged, and in others but very slight, that:— First. We can first burn every vessel tbafc- Ieaves a foreign port for tbe United States. Second, We can burn every transport that leaves the harbor of New York, or other Northern ports, with supplies for tbearmies ofthe enemy in tbe South^ Third. Burn every transport and gun-boat on the Mississippi River, as well as devastate thecopntryof the enemy and fill his people with terror and consternation. , . "lam notaonfeofthisopinibu, but many other gen tlemen are as fully and thoroughly Impressed with the conviction as lam. I believe we have tho means at ourcommapd, if promptly appropriated and energeti cally applied to demoralize the Northern people m a very short time. For the purpose of satisfying your mind upouthe subject I respectfully but earnestly re^ quest that you will have an interview With General Harris, formerly amember of Congress from, Missouri, who, I ttliPfc. is able, by conclusive proofs, to convince ynu that wlmttf have suggested Is perfectly feasible and practicable. ¦"- ¦ ;- "The deep interestl feel for the success of our cause in this struggle, and the conviction of the importance of availing ourselves of every element of defense, must be my excuse for. writing you and requesting you to Invite General Harris to see ydu". If you should see proper to do so, please signify to me the time When it will be convenient for you to see bim. " "I am, respectfully; your obedient servant, "W. S. O'LAHM." Optbebackof the letter are two indorsements, , tbe first being "Hon. W. S.O'Lahm, Richmond,' February 1*2 , lfifio I« relation to pi ans and means o f burning the enemy's shipping, cameawav __ . Q. Describe the chair? A. TUere Is no chair here like it; it was one'of those1 Mgh>backed chairs, with a high red cushion on it, covered With- satin; the last 68 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. .'Season, when they got it, it was, in the private box, :butMr.Ford told me take itoutof'the box and carry it up to his room. ''„*-, CJ, Was the furniture there manufactured for the box, and was it of the same character as the chair ? A. Yes; a sofa and some other chairs; it was not my bu siness to be locking in this place, and I never noticed only when I wassent; thesofa was covered,, I think. with thesame material: I do not know whether the furniture was bought as the property of the stageor the private box. i ' By Judge Holt.— CJ. Did you take a large chair out of this box at the time you put this one in? A; No sir. Re-Examination of John J. Toffey. By Judge Holt.— Q, Since you were examined yester day state whether you have, been to a stable, and the borse*f which you weres peaking? A Yes;T found him on the corner of Seventeenth and I streets. Q. Didyou recognize bim as tbe horse you took up with the saddle and bridle under the circumstances younientioned inyourtestimony? A. Yes, sir. By the Court— O. Is there anything peculiar about that horse of which you were speaking? A. Yes; I found him on thecorner or Seventeenth and T streets. Q. Didyou r;co*nize him as tile horse you took up with the saddle and bridleundertheclrcumstances you mentioned in your testimony? A. Yessir. ' By the Court.— CJ. Is there anything peculiar about that horse which enables you to recognize him ? A. Yes ; his being blind in the right eye. Testimony of William Eaton, 1 Examined by Judge Holt.— CJ. State whether or not, after the assassination of the President, you went to tbe room of J. Wilkes Booth, at the National Hotel, and opened his trunk?' A. I did go there that same eveninapundorihe authority of the Provost Marshal. CJ. What did you do pn arriving there? A. I found J. Wilkes Booth's room; I wasshPWntoit bythebook- keeper; Itook chargeof what things were In his trunk; the papers were taken to the Provost Marshal's office, andhanded over to Lieut. Terry; I placed them inhis bands. Testimony of Iilentenant Terry. . By JudareHo't.— CJ. State whether you are attached to the office of the Provost Marshal of this city. A, Yes» to Colonel Ingraham's office. ' CJ. State whether or not, after tbe assassination, the witness Eaton, placed. in your hands certain papers which he' represented to have been taken from the thank of J. WiikesBootp. A. Heeid. a. State whether the letter you hold in your hands was one ol" these papers? A. Yessir; the; envelope was addressed to -'J. Wilkes Booth, Esq., National Hotel, Washington. D. C," and postmarked seeminely "Bal timore, Maryland, March 30th." The letter was read by Colonel Burnett to the Court, as follows:— Hookstown, Baltimore Co./March 21, 18fi5. Dtca-b. John:— Was business so important that, you could not remain in Baltimore till I saw you? I came ip as soon as I could. -and found you had gone to Wash ington, I catted, also, to see Mike, but learned from bis mother he had gone out with you and had hot re turned. I concluded, therefore, he had gone with you. How inconsiderate you have been. When I left you, you stated we would not meetfpr a month or so; there- fore I made application for employment., an answer * to which I shalj. receive during the week. I told my parents I. had ceased with you. Can I then, under existing circumstances, come as you request? YPu know full well tbe Government sus picions something is going on there; therefore the un dertaking is becoming more complicated. Why not, for the present, desist, for various rqasons, which if you look into you can readily see, without my mak ing any mention thereof. You. nor any onecan cen sure me for my present course. You. have been ils cause, for how can I now come 'after telling them I bad left you? Suspicion rests upon me now from my whole family, and even parties, in the country. I Will be compelled to leave home anyhow, and how soon I care not. No. not one was moie in for tbe enterprise than myself, and to-day wpuld be there, had younotdoneasyouhave; by, thisXinean the manner of proceeding. Iam.asyou well know, in need; lam, you may say, in rags; whereas, to-day I ought to be well clothed. I do not feel right, stalking about without means, and from appearances a beggar. I feel my de pendence, but even this was forgotten, for I was one with you. Times more propitious will arrive; you do Sot act rashly or in naste. I would prefer your rst way. Go and see bow it will be taken in B d,. and ere long; I, shall be better prepared to again assist you. I dislike writing; would sooner verbally make known my .views; yet, you now wait ing, causes me thus to proceed. Do not in anger peruse this.. Weigh all I have said: and. as. a rational man and a friend, you cannot censure por upbrald.my con duct. II sincerely trust this, nor aught else that should or may occur,, willever obliterate, our, former IWeud- 'ship. Write me to Baltimore, as I expect tobe ip about Wednesday or Thursday; or. If .you cap possibly cpme on, I will truly meet you in Baltimore, at B corner. "I subscribe myself iyour friend, ,, ' ,"SAM." Testimony of William McPhaSll. * CJ. Areyou acquainted with the handwriting ofthe prisoner, Samuel Arnold? A. lam. . .- p •• • Q Wiii-youlook at this, letter apdsaylf .Jfcis in hte hand writing? A. Yessir. By Mr. Coxe.— Q. How did ' you become acquainted with his handwriting? state that first. A. He once placed in my hand a written statement^ Q. What instrument did he place in your hands? A. A confession. . > - CJ. When did he write it? A. On the 18th of April. CJ.. Where? A. In the back room of Marshal Mc- Ph airs 'Office. CJ. Where is that? A. On west Fayette street, near Holliday. in Baltimore; the paper was handed tome, and by me to the Marshal; of its arrival in Washing ton I did not kuow anything, only I was informed of its having been handed to the Secretary of War.> .. CJ. And that was a paper purporting to bea state ment of all tbat he knew.of tnis affair? A. Yes sir. , Testimony of Marshal IHcPhall. CJ. Stateiwhether you are acquainted wi.th the hand writing of the prisoner, Samuel Arnold? A. Only by receiving a letter from him, which was handed me by his father, and dated the I2,th, at Fortress Monroe; The letter being then shown, the witness said, "Yes, this looks like it: this i? the letter." Q. Whose handwriting is that indorsement on the back? A. I should think it was Mr. Arnold's. Q. Have you looked at the body of the letter? A. No sir. CJ. You looked at the handwriting? A. Nosir. CJ. Do you think it is his? A. I dp, sir.. Testimony of Uttleton Newman, CJ. Areyou acquainted with the handwriting of the prisoner Arnold? A. Nosir. CJ. Do you know him? A. Yessir. Q. Witt you state whether or Pot sometime last fall you were present when he received aletterin which money was "inclosed; it' the money was exhibited to you, and what was tbe-cbaracter of this letter? A. On . the 9th or 12th or September there was a letter brought to him; there was in the same twenty or fiity dollars, I don't recollect which; I remarked he was flush, or bad money and having read the letter, he hauded it over to me and I read some ball dozen lines,' but I did not understand it; itwas very ambiguous in its language, and I asked him what it meant; hesaid it wassome- thirig big, and I would soon' see in the papers, or some* thing 'to that effect. Testimony of Ethan .T. Horner. Q. Will you state whether or not some days after the assassination' of the President, you arrested tbe pri soner, Samuel Arnold? A. On the morning of the 17th of April jastj Mr. Allen and myself arrested him at Fortress Monroe. CJ. Didyou find any arms in his possession? A. Yes sir ; we took them in ^he room at the back of the store in which he slept; we searched his person and a car pet-bag and got a pistol : he said he had another pistol and aknilealso at his father's place near the Hooks- town road. Q. What kind of a pistol was that you found? A. A Colfs.pistol. CJ. Was it like tbat (showing the witness a pistol)? A, Nosir: not like that; bpthe said he left a pistol like that at his father's. , By Mr. Ewing.-^Didn'the say he left a knife and a pistol at Hookstown, and what else did he say to ynu? A. He made a verbal statement to us at Fprfj- ress Monroe: there was a letter given us by his father to. give to him when we arrested him, and after we handed him tbe letter and hehad read it l asked him if he was going fo give us the statement, and he gave us (vie, together with the names of certain men con nected with the abduction, or istherwith the kidnap- pingof Abraham Lincoln. Mr. Cox here^ rpse aud objected to any confession made by the prisoner that would or might tend to evi dence, against any .other, ofthe accused. Mr. Ewing, and ,Mr. Cox had a.lpngthv argument, which finally resulted in a ruling By the Court, admit ting as. evidence the statement of the witness of the whole conversation that took place at the time re ferred to. The. witness then continued, and said the prisoner had stated to him that about two weeks previous to bis going- to Fortress Monroe he was at 'a meeting, held at the Lichten House; 1 asked him who attended the meeting, and he gave me the names. Here the, witness topk out a paper and read there from, J. W. Booth, M. O'Laughlin, G. W' At eroth, John, Sprratt, and a man with an alias of Moseby^ and a small man whose name I couldn't recollect. Q. Did he say whether hewas present at tbe meet ing- himself? A. Yes sir; I asked him jr he corres ponded with Booth; hesaid first that he did not; then I mentioned to, him a , letter published in the Sunday American, where there was given a statement of a letter found In J. Wilkes Booth's trunk, and I mentioned to, him that the letter was mailed at Hookstown and signed "Sam;" when he §aidthat he had writtep that letter, and thatevempg TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. w&brought him to Baltimore; I asked him if Wilkes Booth was acquainted any in St. Mary's county or Charles county, andhe said he. had letters, Pf introduc- tipn to Dr, Mudd and Dr. Queer; I asked who he got them from, and he said he did not know; we proceeded to Baltimore and I left him in the office of the Provost Marshal. CJ. Did he not state to you any description of what took place at the meeting? A. Yes; I recollect his saying that Booth eot angry at bim because he said if the thing was not done that week he would with draw, and that Booth then 'said he ought to be shot, and he replied it took two to play at that game. CJ. Didhe not sayt i you tbat he then withdrew from the arrangement, and accepted, a position with John W. Walton, at Fortress Monroe? A. Yessir. < CJ, Did he state tiie exact date when that meeting was. held at Washington? A. He may have done so but I cannot recollect it. Q.'Did he tell you that be had seen Booth since that night? A. I dan't recollect whether he said be had seen Booth siocb tbat evening, but he said he would not have any connection with things if it was not done during that week, and that Booth said he would be justified in shooting him if he should with draw. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— Did he not state to you that he did alterwards withdraw? A. He may have said so, but I don'&recollect. ." Q. Hesaid to you then tbat after tbat time he had had nothing i urther to do with the conspiracy? A. Yes, ne said that, ; Q. Did he say where he went then? A. He went to Fortress MOnroe and accepted the position under Walton. CJ. Bid.he say what time he accepted it? A. The 1st day of April or the last day of Match, I am not cer tain which. CJ. Did he not say this interview was at Gau tier's, in stead of theLichten House? A. I may be mistaken, but I thiDk he said the Licbten House: I knew he said itwas in Louisiana avenue, between Sixth and Four- and-a-half streets. CJ. Did he say anything as to what had been the pur pose ofthe parties a'ter the time he withdrew? A. He said the purpose of the party when he was a member of it, was to abduct the headsottheGovernment, so as to force tbe North to have an exebatage of prisoners. or something to that effect: I asked him, also, what his part was to be ip the conspiracy, and I think he saidthathe was to catch the President when he was thrown from tbe box ofthe theatre. With the exception of O'Laughlin and Mrs. Surratt. all theprisoners jomed in tbe laugh which the idea of Arnold catching Mr. Lincoln in his arms naturally in duced. . CJ. Did he say anything as to hts writing a letter to Booth, or as to Booth's Importuning him to continue in the plot? A. There was a good deal of talking, and I don't recollect all that was said. « CJ. Don't you recollect h s saying that Booth went to his father's house twice alter that, in order to get him to so on with the conspiracy? A. No sir; I do not re collect that. ^ Q. Did he say anything as to whom tbe arms be longed? A. I asked him where . he got the arms, and he said Booth got the arms for the whole party. , . CJ. Didn't he say Booth told him when he left the conspiracy to sell the arms? A. Yes sir. CJ. To what arms was be then alluding? did you un derstand bim as referring to the arms at his father's bouse, to the one pistol? A. Booth told, him to sell the aims. Q. Did you understand him to mean that the pistol was part of the arms tbat he had at his father's house, the same arms? A. Yes sir. By Mr. Ome.— Did he staqe to you that that was the first and oniy meeting he ever attended? A. No sir; it was the first ireeting, from what he told me. CJy pid he tell you that the meeting came to the con clusion that the plot was impracticable? A. He said he did. ¦»Q. Did he tell you that they did? Didn't, he say that tfce: scheme fell through because they al^conclpded it impracticable? A. He only said that he, individually, considered it so. ; -By; Judge Holt*— CJ. Did I understand you to say that she. meeting itself had determined to abandon the attack on the President ? A. No';sir;only himself. Q. State whether you found a rope in his carpet bag at Fortress Monroe. A. I don't recollect any. Q. Didhe not tell you what the date of the, meeting was? A* He may have, but I don't recollect; it was a week or two be'ore he went to Fortress Monroe; he might have said three weeks. . &y Mr. Aiken.— CJ. Was the pame of Mrs. Surratt mentioned to you by Arnold? ' A. No sir, not to my recollection. , By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. Did you examine his carpet bag at Fortress Monroe? A. Yes sir. CJ. You found no rope there? A., I don't recollect anv. ¦ Q. Did he not say to you that Booth had a letter of Introduction to Mr. Queen or Dr. Mudd? A. Wo sir, I understood him to say and Dr. Mudd. . Q. Which Dr. Mudd? A. There is only one, I think, in Charles county. ¦ i By Mr. Stone.— Q. Did he.speak of Mr. Queen or Dr. Mudd?, A. Dr. Queen and Dr. Mudd. Testimony of Mr. Thomas. Q. State whether or not you are acquainted with tbe prisoner at the bar, Dr. Mudd? A. I am, sir. Q. State whether or not Bofne weeks since, before the assassination of the President, you saw him and had a conversation with hiim A. Yes sir. Q. Where did it occur? A. At Mr. Downey's. Q. In that conversation did he speak of tbePresl-i dent of the United States? A. He said that the Presi dent of the UnitedStates was an Abolitionist, and that the whole Cabinetwere such, and that the Southwould not be subjugated under Abolition doctrine: hesaid the whole Cabinet would be killed within six or seven.' weeks and every Union map in Baltimore; hemad&a remark to me that I was no be ter than they were. Q. Was he silent in, his manner? A. He was not much excited. Q. Did you have any conversation with him about politic;;? A. I made tbe remark that the war would soon be over; that South Carolina and Richmond were taken, and we would soon have peace; then he went on stating that the South never would be subjugated; that* tbe President and Cabinet were all Abolitionists and would bs killed, and every Union man in the State of Maryland. Cross-examination by Mr. Stone.— Q. How far is your place from Dr. Mfldd's? A. About a mile and a half. Q. Did you see Kim frequently? A. Not very. Q. Was Mr. Downey present when you had this con versation? A'. I believe he was out, sir. Q. How long did he remain out? A. I am not able to say precisely. ' Q. Did you have any conversation with Dr. Mudd be fore Mr, Downey left tbe room?, A. I believe I had. ¦> Q. He left while you were conversing? A. Yes sir. Q. How did that conversation commence? A. It commenced about the warr I said the war would soon be over, .and that I was glad to see it. Q. Had you been discussing the question of exempt ing persons from military service? A. No sir. ' Q. Nothing was said about tbat? A. Not a word. - Q. When did this conversation occur? A. Sometime1 in March; in the latter part of March. Q. What wassaidaf'ter Downey's return? A. I asked him, as he had taken the oath of allegiance, whether heconsidered it binding; hesaid hewas a loyal man; but he didn't consider tho oath binding. CJ. Had you met him at Downey's any other time during the year* A. That was the only time sir. Q, How long did you remain there that day? A. Half c r three-quarters of an hour, p( rhaps. Q. Was not Dr. Mudd's manner jocose? A. No sir. Q. D^d he seem to be in earnest? A. It is impossible for me to say whether he was in earnest or not. Q. Did it leave any serious impression upon your mind? A. Nosir, I didn't suppose such athingcould come to pass; I went home and repeated what be saidj and we all laughed at it; I-thought that the man had more sensethan to use such an expression; Q. Did Mudd look as if be really believed it himself? A. When he first said it I couldn't think that be meant it, but after the President was killed, and Booth had, been at his house, I thought that he meant it. Q. Did he tell you how the President and the Cabi net wtereto be killed? A. No sir. CJ. If you had supposed tbat there was any conspiracy would you not have'given the information to the au thorities? A. I did. Q. Who to? A. To everybody I saw. Q. Can you name any one you told it to? A. Yes sir; I told it to my brothers. I told it to Watson, I told it to many persons in Woodville, I told it to old Peter Wood. Q. But did you give any information to afiy one in authority? A. I wrote to Colonel Holland about it; the Provost Marshal of the Fifth Congressional Dis trict in Maryland. - Q. When? A-Oneweekaferhesaidit. CJ. Did you gel' an answer ? A. No sir, and I came 'to the conclusion that the ;Colonel never received my letter. CJ, You are sure the conversation you have detailed is all that occurred? A. Yes sir. Q. Who, left first? A. Weleit about thesame time. Q. Did you go together? ¦ A. Np; I went home, and he went to hts house, I guess. Q. When Mr. Dpwney returned didn't Dr. Mudd say- to him that you had been calling the Rebel army our army? A. No sir nothing ofthe sort. Q. Did you mention this conversation to your bro ther' before the assassination? A. Yessir. Q. To which of your brothers? A. To Dr. John C. Thomas. Q, Did you mention It to Mr. Watson before the assassination? A. Yessir. Q. What is his full name? A. Lemuel Watson. f> Q. You spoke of Mr. Wood; was it Peter Wood, Sr.? A. Yes, the old man, sir. Q. Did you mention jt tp him before or after tho assassination? A., After, sir. 10 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ¦ '^, M£. Downey didn't1 seem to think anything of this talk of Dr. Mudds'? A. I. told you he was not there at the time, sir, and when I mentioned it to him be said he was glad he did not hear alnyfching about it. Testimony of John Iffopp. • iQ. Look at that paper, and state if you have seen it before. Here the witness read the following telegram: "To M. O'Laughlin, No. 57 N. Exeter street, Balti- more„Md.:— Don't you fear to neglect your business. You had better comeatonce. J. BOOTH." Q. State whether you are a telegraphic operator in this city? A. I am a clerk in the office. Q. State whether this despatch was sent at the time of its date? A, Yes Sir; it was, but the year should be 1865, and not 1864; that's one pf the old printed forms. Q. Do you know the handwritingof John Wilkes Booth? A. Yes Sir: I saw hhn write that. Cross-examined by Mr. Cox.— Q. "Don't you fear to neglect your business: you had better comeatonce,'' Cap you tell me whether this is a question or a com mand? Objected to, and the question was waived. Testimony ©F E. C. Stewart. Qj State whether you are a telegraphic operator In this city? A. Yes sir. at the Metropolitan Hotel. CJ. Look at this despatch and state whetheryou have any, knowledge of its leaving been sent? A. Yes, I sent itmyself. The witness reads:— "March 27-th, 180-1, M. O'Laughlin, No. 59 Exeter street, Baltimore. Md. Get word to Sam. and come in with or without him on Wednesday, morning. We sell that day sure. Don't fail. J. Wilkes Booth." CJ. is this last March or last March a year ago? A. Last Marchj that is one ofthe.oJ^tforms, Q. Did you know this man? A. Ko sir. Here aphotqgraph of John WilkesBooth was shown to the witness, who, on seeing it, said:— "That's the man that sent it.".- * ,, 'Cross-examined by Mr. Cox,— CJ, You know it was s.ent in March, 1SG5? A. \res.sir, ,, Q. It is dated 1864? A- That's one of the 0\d forms; but I, remember it was sent this year. Q. Is tbat your indorsement on it? A. Yessir. Q. How long have you been an operator at the Me tropolitan Hotel? A. About ten mouths. Bv Judge Ho:t.— Q. You were not there in March, 1864? A. Nosir. The examination of this witness being concluded, the Court adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow morning. , Washington, May 19.— The witnesses for the de* ftnse were to-day dismissed until Monday. About twenty have thus far been summoned. The tT-nited States have probably thirty more witnesses to ex-' amine, and as the effort will be made to conclude' the testimony fdfc the prosecution to-morrow,' the .trial Wiil probably be closed pext week, ¦ 1 TestfimOBay of Colonel J. M. Taylotf. By Judge Holt.— Q. State whether yon are connected with tbe Provost Marshal's pfiioe at Washington? A. No sir: I am on duty at the head-quarters of the Department at Washington. . Q. Look at that paper, marked No. 7,. and state whether yuu ever beiore had it in your hands, andiirom whom you received it? (The paper referred to was one taken from the trunk of ;J. Wittees Booth, and in re gard to which the witness, Lieutenant Tyrrell, testified tbat it was written in the cipher of the Confederate t bates.,) A. I have had it in my hands; I received it ¦om Lieutenant Tyrrell, an officer on duty in the Pro^ vost Marshal's, office, on the night of the 14th of April; leave it to Colonel Wells on tiie 15th. Q. You received it from Lieutenant Tyrrell as one of the papers found in the trunk of J. Wilkes Booth? A. Yessir; for which I had sent him. Testimony of Charles Rosen. By, Judge Advocate Holt— Q. Do Vou recognize tbe prisoner, Edward Spangler? A1. I do halt know him personally; I was not present at his arrest. , Q. Didyou go tphis house after his arrest? A. Yes sir. Q. What, did you find there? A. A carpet bag, in which was apiece of rope, which I measured after wards and found tobe eighty-oue feet in length; the twist appeared tp. have been taken out of it; there was nothing else In'tbe carpet bag except some blank paper aud a dirty shift collar. CJ. Where was that carpet bag. with the rope left? A. At the house where Spangler tobk his meals, oh the N. W. corner of Seventh andH streets Q. When was It left? A. That I do not knoW. ' Q, Who were with you when you took the, rope? A. Two df the milltaryof the Provost Marshal's force; I do not know their names, ¦ Q. vbu did notseeSpahglei him'Seli there? A. I did hpt; I was tp go with the other officers to secure the ?apers, and we missed liim; consequently I Was not here when' he Wa-S arrested. - , . Q. Had the carpetbag been opened"? A^Tro Sir; we made out to open it with some keys we found. pap' ¦ Cross-examined by Mr. lEwing.— Q. Where is the i house atwhicb you found thecarpet bag? A. Itis situ- i ated on the northwest comer of Seventh street- and H street Q\ Who gave it to you? A. We tobk it when we ! found it belonged to Spangler, , Q Who was there? A. A man who was commonly, called "Jake," whd worked at the theatre in company with-Spangler; this man told me that 'was Spangler's carpet bag, aud that was all that Spangler had at the house. ... t . '.,,.'' Q, What persons were living or staying lb the house. Didyou see? A. There were- .a couple of persons,' ; boarders. I presume. J did not know any ofthe parties. i Q. In what room did>you find the carpet bag? A. In ¦ a bed room up stairs. ' . Q. In what part of thehouse? A. As near as I can judge, it was on the south side ofthe house; that is. the room faced the south. '. ¦ CJ. Describe the room? A. It was right neafr where Jake kept his trunk. The Commission reassembled at two o'clock, aftee the usual recess. Testimony of Chas. M. Rosen, Continued. CJ. Look at that coil ofrope and state whether or not it is the same which, you found in Spangler's oarpefc- bag? A- (Looking at the rope.) I believe and am satisfied that it is. ' ; , , Q* What did you do with the*monkey wrench? A. I found no-monkey wrench; I would here begleaVeof the Court tu correct so much of the testimony as refers to the locality which I stated4-upon reflection lam convinced that.the house was^-on the northeast corner of Seventh and'H streets; the room was on the second 'flopr. ¦ . ' L. . Q. What was, the number of the room. ,A. There was no number. Testimony of Wm. Eaton, (Continued.) . Q.. State to the Court whether you arrested the r,ri- sone^, Edward Spangler, apd on what day? A. I ar rested him;' I do not recollect the day; it was the week after the assassination. Q. Where did you arrest him? A. In a bouse on Seventh street, near the, Patent Office; it must have been on tbe. south east corner of Seventh street and H. Q. Do you know whose house it was? A. I do not. Q. Did you find, any weapons in his possessipn ? A, No sir, I did not search him. Q, Was it 'his boarding-house? A. I think it was. CJ. Who was with. him ? a. There were some ladies in the house. , Testimony of Willii&m Wallace. ' By the Judge Advocate.— Q. State whether 'or not some lime afier the assassination of the President you arrested the prisoner, O'Laughlin? A. I did; oh the 17th of April. -' Q. Where? A. At the house of a family named Bailey, in.High street, Baltimore.1 ' Q. Was that his boarding house? A. I think not; I think his boardibg hodse, or the house where a.4 stopped, was that of -his brother-in-law. No. 57 EXetei street. '- Q. Did you ask him why he was there instead of bis boarding house? A. I did; he sai-d that when he ar rived in town on Saturday he was told that the officers had been looking for him; and that he" went away to the house of a friend of his, Where he stopped on Satmv day or Sunday night. CJ, Did he ask you what you had arrested him for? A. He seemed to understand what it was for. CJ, Did he ask you at all in regard to tho cause?' A» Nothing that oceUrs to my mind at present. Q,' Did he speak ;o'i the assassination ofthe President at all? A. Hespoke of it as being a very bad affair. Q. Did yoU find aiiy arms in his possession? A. No sir; we searched him and found none whatever. Cross-examined by Mr. Fox.— Ci. Did the brother-in- law oftheprisoner send for the prisoner or go with you to arrest him? \ Judge Bingham objected to tbe question. ' Mr. Cox stated that the object Was to show tbat the brother-in-law of the prisoner went after himvoluni tarily. ¦ . . Judge Binghapi replied tbat the question was not properly a portiofi ofthe cross-examination) but was altogether new matter. What the prisoner said1 tb hlfl brother-in-law b&dmot1 been -offered in evidence, and4 in addition to that, it had been shown that the pri soner had resolved not to be takehat home, and was going tb change his bbajrdins-house. Mr. Cox.— Tho Object of the prosecution, I presume; IS to show tbat the purpose ofthe prisoner in changing his lodgings wns to avoid arrest,tbe; witness haVifti testified that the prisoner was Jbund elsewhere I4e- siro to ask bim whether -be found the i risoner at tmfl instance of his (the prisoner's) brother-in-law The Abjection wa3 overruled, the Commission decid ing that the question should bo answered. : A: The prisoner's brother-in-law, Mr. Mallsby^ I am well acquainted with: hewas recommended tp rneon SUbday evening as being' A good TJnJbn man, as one hi whom I Could place confidence: he-1 knew I was look* ingforMr. O'litagfeMn; I told him I wished hta<«* assist me; be said that anything he could do to assis TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. LEWIS C PAYNE. DAVID C. HABOLD. THE SCENE OF THE GREAT TIAflEI n ST. L X 3SE X 3* ;alle Y 1 pi ALLEY o o 03 "H (A in i A—Public School. J3 — Herndon House, (Hotel). C The only vacant lot communicating with alley. D— The only alley outlet to F street. E— Bank (formerly Savings Bank). O rrj X — Restaurants. G — newspaper Office. H — Model House. I — House taken to after tne act K— The alley by which the aiurde.-cr escaped. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 11 me he would do; that if he could get any information concerning the prisoner be would impart; it to me; that pn Sunday evening or Monday morning heca-me to me andtold me that he thought if I went with him we could find O'Laughlin;! then went with him and arrested the prisoner. Q. Did the prisoner say anything about having re ceived any information as to whetaer the detectives had been at his house? A. I think hesaid that when begot to his house on Saturday afternoon heheard that they had been there. , ,,. CJ. Did he protest his innocence of the .crime? A. He said be knew nothing whatever about it. CJ. Did he say,he could show his innocence by the persons with whom.he had been in company? A He said he could account for his whereabouts all the time that be was in Washington, through parties who were there with him. CJ. Didhe say he left home after being advised that detectives were there after him? A. I do not remember that he said so. Testimony of James GiOorcfl. By the Judge Advocate— Q. State whether you have been connected with Ford's Theatre in this citv. and in what capacity? A. I have been in the capacity of builder. J Q, You were the carpenter of the building? A. Yes sir. CJ. Did you occupy that position on the 14th and loth of April last? a. Yes.sir. CJ, Did you observe the President's box on that dar? A. Nosir;'! was not in it. CJ. Doyou recollect having seen any. one in it? A. well, I saw Mr. Harry Clay Ford in it at one time, and Mr. Beybold. CJ. Any one else? A. Nosir. CJ. Did you observe a large rocking chair which was In the President's box on the day of the Hth? A.I did not notice it on the Hth. CJ. "When did you see it? A. I saw it on the following Sunday in the box. CJ, Do you know when it was placed in the box , and by whom? A. I do not. CJ. Do you know whether it was ever there before? A. I do not think it bas .been there before during this season: I saw it last season. - Ci, Do you know who took it away? A. No sir. Ci. Do you know whether the stage scenes remain now as ihey weroon the morning ot the assassination Tho witness* reply Was somewhat inaudible at the reporter's desk, but ho was' understood to say that with the exception of a slight disarrangement which had been made by order ofthe Secretary of Wac in order to secure a view of tho stage, the scenes were in tbe same position as on the morning of 'the assassination. 6i- Have you examined the wall in the Presidents box? A. Yes sir. 1 Q. When did you examine it? A. I think it was on Monday morning after the assassination when I first saw ir. CJ. You had not seen it before? A. No sir. CJ. When had you been in the box last?. A. I cannot state positively: I judge i t was within a week. CJ. Do you think that if the mortice had been there: you would have observed it? A. Yes sir, I should think so. CJ. Had it the appearance of having been very re- centlymade? A. It looked so to me. CJ. By what instrument would you suppose it to have been made? A. I should think it was made by a knife. CJ. Would It not require a good while to make it with a knife? It is quite a large mortice? A. It wouldre- quireaman some fifteen minutes, I should judge. CJ. If the three doors of the place were all closed it would have been entirely dark there, would it not? A. Yes sir. CJ. Do you not think that one or more of thds^ doors must have been opened when this mortice was made? A. It might have been so; some light would have been required, I should think. Q. Would not such an operation, made with an open 1 door, be likely to attract tbe attention of persons con nected with the theatre? A. If a knife were used it would not; if a chisel or hammer were used, they would create sounds. Q What were the duties of the prisoner, Spangler? A. He worked on the stage, made scenery,. fixed up tbe stage. &g. Q. Was the decoration of this boxvwithin the line of his duties? A. No sir; there was a gentleman there bythe name of Beybold, who , U. state the circumstances attending your meeting with him that evening? A. I retired to bed about 7 o'clock on the night of the> 14th, with the understand ing that I would be called.at.il o'clock, to set up with my father; I very shortly fell asleep, and so remained until wakened by the screams. of my sister; I jumped out of bed and ran into my father's room in, my Shirt and drawers; the gas7 in tbe room had been shut down rather low, ana. I saw what appeared to be two men, one trying to hold the other; my, first impression, was tbat my father had become delirious, aud tbat the nurse was trying to hold him. I wentupandtook'holdofhim, but saw atoncefrom his size and tbe struggle that it was not myiather; it then, struck me that the nurse had become delirious and was striking about the room at random; knowing Lhe delicate state of my'father's health, I endeavored.. to shove the person I had bold of.to the door, with the intention of putting him out of his room: while I was pushing him he struck me five or six times over the head with whatever hehad. in his. left .hand; I sup posed it at the time to be a bottle or a decanter he had seized lrom the table: during/ -this time he repeated with an intensely strong voice ¦=-" J am mad, I am mad;" on reaching the hall be gave a sudden turn aud n TrfiAL OF THE, ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. breaking away from me, disappeared down stairs; while in the vicinity of tbe door of my father "a room, as I was pushing him out, when he came opposite the light in the half it shone on him,- nndlsawh-Im dis tinctl'y: I saw that ho was- a very large man, with dark straight hair, smooth face and no beard; I no ticed the expression of hiseountenance; I then went into my room and got my pistol which had to be taken out from the bottom of my carpet bag: I then went downstairs, intending to shoot the -person if be at tempted to return; while standing- at the door the ser-* vant boy came back and said the man bad ridden off on horseback; I then realized tpr the first time that the man was an assassin who had entered thehouse • for the purple of murdering my lather? Q. Didyou then return to your father's room? A. I suppose it was five minutes before I got back; there was quite a crowd collected at the door; I sent for a doctor, and made arrangements to keep the crowd out; it may not have been three minutes.- Q. State whether you examined the number and character of the wounds given your father and bro ther, Mr. Fred. W. Seward? A. No, I did not examine them that night; I was beaten very badly myself. I found when I-igot up stairs again; after my father's wounds bad been dressed and after my arm had been bandaged, I went in and saw my father; he had one very large gash on his right cheek, besides acut on histhroat, on the right side, and one under his left arm; I did not examine my brother's wounds; I did not know that night bow badly he was hurt; the next day he was insensible and so remained, and iff was tour or five davs before I saw what his wounds were. CJ. What did you then discover? A. There were two wounds about here (pointing to the left side of the head, over the ear), after1 the piece of the skull had been taken out it left the brain exposed. . CJ. Had he received ahy stab at all f'rdru the knife? A. I never saw anything of my brother during the whole time. CJ. Did the wound indicate tbata knife had been used? A. I thought myself it was done by a knife, but the surgeon seemed to think itwas done bythehammerof the pistol; 11> was sucba. wound as I would have sup posed might haye been done with a knife. Q. Did you see a pistol picked up in that room? A. I did not; I know there was one picked up. CJ. Did you see anv article of clothing? A. Yes; a bat. CJ. Would you recognize it? (producing a bat). A. Yea, I am quite certain that is the hat; I saw tha^hat after it had been picked up and put in abureau drawer; it was taken out and shown to me the next day; I did not see it that night. Q. And you say you supposed it to have been the nurse? A. Yes; I had no idea who the man was until be was out of thehouse. Q. You say that vou were struck with a knife? A. The susgeons think it was with a knife I was struck: I supposed at the time it was with a bottle or a de canter; that the nurse had become delirious and was striking at random. Q,j„Do you feel entirely satisfied that the person at the bar is the same man? A. I do. ' Cross-examined by Mr. Doster;— CJ. Be good enough to state whetti er this is the first timeyou have seen the Srisoner since he was taken? A. No; Isawhimon oard the monitor the day after he was taken. CJ. Didyou identify him then? A. Yes. ¦Q. Please state; the. circumstances.- A. He was brought up on the monitor; I took hold of him the same way I dia,in-the roona. and looked up in his face; he had the same features, with his size, bis propor tions, his swarthy face, and no beard that I noticed, and when he was-made to repeat the words, "lam mad, I am mad," I recognized the same voice, vary ing only in intensity. Testimony of Richard €. Morgan. Examined by Judge H^blt,— CJ, State whether or not on the 17th or 18th of April last; you were in the service ofthe Government, andlf so, in what capacity? A. 1 am in the serviceof the War Department, actingunder the orders of Colonel Olcutt. CJ, State whether on one or both of these days, you had possession ot the house of the prisoner, Mrs. Sur ratt? A. Yes. CJ. State where that house is? A. No. 548 H street, city of Washington. CJ. State whether or not you tpok possession of the bouse, and what occurred there? A. About twenty minutes past 11 o'clock on the evening of the 17th of April, in company with other officers, I went to tbe house of Mrs. Surratt for the purpose of seizing the papers that might be found, and of arresting the In mates ofthe house; after we had been atthe house about ten minutes, and Major Smith, Captain Weuners- kerch, and some otber officers bad arrested the in mates of the house, who were in the parlor all ready to come out. I bad sent an officer for a carriage to take them away, when I heard a knock and a ring at tbe ¦ door atthe same time; Captain Weunerskerch and my self went to tbe doo* and opened it; the prisoner, Payne, came in; he had a pickaxe in his band; he had on a grey coat and black pants, a hat made outot tbe sleeves of a shirt, I judged; as soon as he. came in and immediately closed the door, he said, "I guess I an* mistaken." said I, "who do you want to see?" Pie replied, "Mrs. Surratt;'! sain I. "you are right, walk iii." He took a seat. I said, "what did 'vou come here for, this time of night?" he said he came to dig a gutter; that Mrs. Surratt bad sent lor him; I asked him when and, he said in the morning; I asked him where ho last worked, and be paid somewhercon Ninth street; I asked bim where he boarded, he said he had no boarding house, -that he was a poor man, and earned his living with the pick axe in his hand; I asl:cd Mm how much he made a- day, hesaid, nothing at all sometimes, sometimes one doll&T. and sometimes one dollar and fifty cents;, "have you any money?"- "Not a cent." I asked him why became at this time of night? he said he came- to 'see where itwas to be dug. so that he could commence early in the morning; I said, have' you had no previous acquaintance with Mrs. Surratt? he said, No; I said, why did she select you for this work? be replied, that she knew he was working in that neighborhood; that he was a poor man, and she' cametohirh; I asked him how old he was, and he said about twenty; I asked him where he was from; he said, from Fauquier county, Va.,' previous to this he had pulled out an oath of allegiance, handed it to me and.said, that will show you who I am; ^contained the name of Louis Payne, Fauquier county, Va.: I asked' him if be was from the 'South; besaidhewas: lasked him when he left there; he said two months ago, in February; lasked him why he«left; hesaid that he bad to leave or go into the army; that he preferred to earn his living with the pick -axe; I asked him ti'he could read; hesaid no; I asked him if he could write; he said he could manage to write his- own name, CJ. Is that the pick-axe he had on his shoulder (pro- ' ducing the pick)? A. Yes; Ithen told him;he would* have to go to tbe Provost Marshal- and explain; he moved a little atthat, and did not answer; the carriage had arrived to take up the women; they were sent off, and Payne was also taken away in charge of offi cers; Major Smith* Captain Wennerskerch, and myself remained to search for yapers; we did not leave till &) o'clock the next morning. Q. Did Mrs. Surratt leave the bouse before Payne came, or afterwards? ' A. They were preparing to leave and were in tUe parlor; Mrs. Surratt was di rected to get thehonnets and shawls of the others, so that, there should1 be no communication with each other; she did so- and they were just ready to go and had started to go when we opened the door; I think they passed out as Payne came in. CJ. Tbenshedidnotseebim'beforesbeleft? A. Yes, she must have seen him as she passed out; I heard no - conversation in regard to it. ^ CJ. State what papers you found there? A. I found several paper and photographs* ,CJ.' Did you find these photographs of J. Wilkes Booth? A. No: the next morning I was shown apho-1 tograph of J. Wilkts Booth, taken from her house.. found behind a picture; we found photographs of Jeff! Davis, Alex. H. Stephens and of Beauregard: we also ¦ found a card picture with tbis upon it, *'Thus will it ever be with tyrants—the mighty .sic semper tyrannis." Q. Will you give tbe name of the man who mupd the,, photograph ot Booth? A\ I think it was Lieutenant Dempsey. ¦ Q. Were you or not afterwards at the Provost Mar shal's office? A. About three o'clock -in the rriorning I got there; Mrs. Surratt had been there and had been taken to the Old Capitol Prison before my arrival?. ' CJ. Did you hear Mrs. Surrattsay anything in reglfrd to theprisoperat any time? A. No.; Cross-examination by Mr. Aiken.— Q. Have you not. been in the habit of seeing found in a traveling sack? a. No, I am positive of that. i Q. Were any of the photographs found in that bag? A. No, they were found in portfolios and on the man telpiece;' CJ. State if Mrs. Surratt made any remarks in regard to Payne. A. As she passed out it now comes to my recollection that, she made some remark to Major Smith, but I did not hear what it was. CJ. Did you examine the traveling bag which was taken from the house? . A. No sir. I took the traveling bag but did not examine it; we had n 6 key to open ic Q. Did' you examine It alter you left the. bouse? were not tbe photographs of Jeff. Davis and A. H. Stephens found in that bag? A. No, I saw it opened at the Pro vost Marshal's office, and it contained nothing. Testimony of Major Smith. By Judge HohV-'CJ. State whether you were in Mrs. Surratt's bouse on the night of her arrest? A. Yes, I TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 75 , was in charge ofthe party who took possession of the bouse. CJ. Did yo\a see Mrs. Surratt after the arrest of the prisoner Payne? A. Yes. Q. Did you make any inquiry of her in regard to bim? A. Alter questionhig Payne in regard to his oc- cupatici), and-as to what business he bad at the house that night, hesaid he was a laborer and that became there to-dig agutterat the Tequest of Mrs. Surratt; I stepped rothedoorof ibeparlorandsaia^Mrs.Surratt, will you step here for a moment;" Mrs. Surratt came there, andsaidl, *'Do you know this man?" she said, raising her right hand. " Before God I do not know this man, and have never seen Mm. ' Ithen placed Payne under arrest, considering him a suspicious character, and that I should send him to General Augur's head quarters for examination. Q. Was he standing in full view of her when she made this remark? A. Yes. , Q, You refer to Mrs. Surratt, the prisoner at the bar? (Mrs. Surratt .raised her veil.) A. Yes. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— CJ. Did ^m examine a bag taken from Mrs. Surratt's house? A. Hound a bag there, but did not see it examined. Q. Didyou find any photographs there? A. I did, a number of them. Q/ Of what persons? A. Various persons; it is Im possible to tell who they were. CJ. Did you find a photograph in that house of Jeff. Davis or Alexander H. Stevens? A. I do not remem ber CJ. Have youjact seen these photographs In the pos session of persons supposed to be loyal? A. Yes,,.a ¦ great many, but only those who obtained them, since the trial. CJ. Are you not aware that it is a common thing for the photographs of eminent actors to be published and scattered broadcast over the land? A, I am, of eminent actors. (J. State distinctly where these photographs were found? A/They were found in Mrs. Surratt's house; some of them were found in a photographic album lying on the mantelpiece in the front parlor; there wer,e pictures of different people, with whom I bad no acquaintance at alh Q. What was transpiring in the house at the time Mrs: Surratt made the assertion you speak Of in regard to her knowledge of Payne? A. The man Payne had just come in at tbe frontdoor; I was ques tioning him at the time in regard to what his profes sion was, if he had any, and what business he had at that house at that time of night? Q. How was Payne dressed that night? A. He had on a grey coat, black pants, and a rather fine pair of boots; hehad on bis bead what seemed to be a grey worsted shirt sleeve, which was hanging over one side. CJ. Were his pantaloons tucked into his boots? A. They were rolled up over the top of one leg only CJ. He did not strike you atthe timeas being-a gen tleman from bis appearance, did he? A. Not particu larly "so. CJ. His appearance was not in any wise geateel, was it?. A. Not at all. Q.- Are you of the opinion that any one would recog nize a person in that garb, as the same person he had seen before dressed as a gentleman? A. I certainly am. (A dirty grey worsted knit shfrt sleeve was here pro duced, and identified by witness as the one Payne wore on his head the night of hisarrest.) Q. What remark did you make to Mrs. Surratt as you were leaving the house? A. I made none. CJ. Did you say anything to her about being ready? A. I said nothing at all; Isaidgetready. -Q. What was her attitude at tnat time? A. She was seated at a chair in the front parlor. Q. Was she not kneeling? A. She was not. Q. Who was present at the time of tbe asseveration she made tbat she did not know Payne? A. Captain Wernie and Kirsch, subordinates in the Department. CJ. Was that all tbe remark she made to you about Payne? A. That was all the remark she made in my bearing. (J, Mis. Surratt did not attempt to evade tbe ques tion you asked her, did she? A. No, her answer was direct. CJ. Was it light In her ball at tbe time ? A, Yes, very light; the gas was turned on full head, , Q. Did Mrs. Surratt express any surprise or deep feeling at her arrest ? A. No sir; she did not ask even for what she was arrested; she expressed no surprise or feeling at al L Q. How many persons were arrested together ? A. Mrs. Surratt, Miss Surratt, Miss Fitzpatrick, and Miss Jenkins. Q. Was there no Inquiry made of you as to the cause of tbe arrest? A. None whatever; when I came there I went up the steps and rang the bell; Mrs. Surratt openedthe window and said * * Is tbat you, Kirby?" the reply was that it was not Kirby, but open the door; she opened the door; I came into the hall and said ••Are you Mrs. Surratt?" she replied"! arm" "the widow of John H. .Surratt?" I added, " and the mother of John H. Surratt, Jr.?" she replied " Ia,m;" I said "I have come to arrest you, and am in your house and take you to General Augur'afpr examina tion;" - '< ' ¦ Q. On any road? A. tltere^ss ».roadLrans from c#e road' to another through- this piece- of woods, and on tbe eastern side of this road I found this coat. Q. Did! I understand you to- say that, biood was upon it when yon fauhst it?" Av Yes sir; that's how I recog nize it. Cross-examined by Mr. Doster.— CJ. When did. you find that coat; state the exact time?/' A. Sometime about 2 o'clock out the i&tb? of ApriL Q. Lying ip the road? A, There-- is a kind of -a path; I should" think, it a-*oaff for drawing- woodj thegrass had grown over it, and on a turn that was in the road I found tbecoat: • say they were distinct,but sufficiently so, tQ^%TlW^l^o^w^tyo^o^ht that name was* A. 1 1said I thought it was the name of a very mSTraiSthfgemSlS the habit of receiving boots ?nconiiectiop^with cri minal trials? ^TheJaoghterthatioilowed this question prevented filie answer. being fceardt at ^ the- Reporter's, a\esk,and! we are obliged to ieave ¦ tb* public umn- formedasto-thehabitsof the Treasury m this.parti- Q. Did vou come to the conclusion as to- what the name was before you knew whoaathe boot was sup posed to be?-: A.. Yessir. Testimony of Mr. Marsb. . Q. Look at that boot and state -whether you-made an, ' examination of it to ascertain what. name was- written there? A-. Itwas show-nt to me by Mr. Fields-, the As-p sistanf Secretary of the Treasury; I examined, it and! thought I couid-make out at first the letters A.J. op I. then A. W. and th, as the Jast letters; then I thought It made out a-B^asia capital? that is. all I could .make opt onafirst examination; then! I though!;! couldmake^ out the intervening .letters; I , was not satisfied about them, but about thaB. •aud fft.1 was. , : 4J. Did you examine it through a glass? A. No sir., Q; Iniegard tOtthose>Jettersy©.u mention, you. have nodoubtat all? A^ No. sir. Q* Invtheintervpnmgrspace was there roam for.one- or two» letters? A. For two or three, but" hat would; depend on. bow they were written; it was about half an inch. Re-examination of William H„ Wells, (Colored.) The proceedings of the Court were here delayed by , an order from. Judge Holt to remove the fettfers from. thehanda of . Payne, im -order, that^he might put on both the coats already spoiiep. of In this records When. Payne was unfettered he rose, and there was, a( hush through the court, and every eye was directed, towards himand mingled expressions of admiration and abhorrence couldbfr distinctly heard; abhorrence-; at his- real or supposed) crime and admiration for.. his fine physical development. His- face-, slightly. flushedaudhisilipscurled. An involuntary smile re vealed the'dimplfiS in hischeeks to which the colored'. boy- had alluded! , in* his. previous.. testimony. He first put'on thecoatof, Confederate grey and over ifc drew* the- Jonger cream colored enough*,'* iri spite of the! solemn importance ofthe words,., the- homeJy^positive- ness otthe boy evoked a laugh, to which Pay;nehin>> self replied by a renewal of bis old. smile. Re-examination of Mr. Robinson. While this witness, was. being looked for the Judge' Advocate-General said, I wish this witness also to see; theprisonerintaispresentdressrthathemay give bis ©pinipntastowhetheritisthesamemanor not. Hav ing taken th&standUVtr. Kohinson said he is more like the man than he was before; I should think that be is, but y etJ. am- not sure about it.. (J. You didn't state precisely thehom* when thisstab- , bing occurred* in. your previous examination? A. It was not far from Ifto-'clock. Cj-Waait before or after 10? A. I think it might be - after. Q, Do you know whether ihe pfetol that was picked ' up there vvks l oaded or not? A. It was loaded., CJ, Did you examine it?' A. Yes-sir* Mr. Bosterhere askedtbat Miss Murray be recalled, to which theCourt consented. Sn order that she might - have an upportimityof seeing' Payne- with the coat. and hat on. Iirwas.found,,bO:W£veir,that M3ss.Mu.rray Jiadleftthe Court-room* , Testimony of Jacofo Ritterspaek. Q^ Smtewhetbery^>laM>wSpangl«r-,theprisoner at the bar? A; Yessir.- CJ. Where did he board? A. Where I did, on. the corner©* -SeventhVand) G-streets. Q. WboarrestedUiim? A; I dot not know. CJ. What Is- tbe nameof the house? A. It has no name, and there is no mumbertn it. CJ. Who owns $,? A. Mr. Ford. CJ. Who fives in that house? A. Mrs. Scott. CJ. "Were you presentwhea he- was arrested? A. No sfr. " , , ' . . CJ. Who ©ccupied the room with bim? A. He never- slept there; he just-got hteaaiealsirn the house. Q. Hadhe isioroominithehouse? A. No* sir. Q. Did yock see tbe rope-that wastaken there? A. No sir; I only knew be had. a vaJiee there; he 'used to keep* TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. rt It there, but tbe detectives- came a\d asked if he bad anything there, and J said, nothing but tho valiso. CJ. Youkhew it was Spahgler's? A. Yes sir. CJ. When did. he tako it there? A. I don't know. CJ. When did you give it to tho detectives? A. On Monday, tho 17th of April. ft. Ain't yon comThonly called "Jake" about the theatre,? A. Yes sir. Testimony of Cant; W. M. Wannerskercta. ft. State whether or not on tbe 16th of April you were* at the house of the prisoner, Mrs. Surratt, in this City, A. Nosir; I was thereon tho night ofthe *7th. CJ. Wore you present when she and Paype met? A. I was present. CJ. Did you or did you not hear Major Smith address any remark to", her, or make atiy. inquiry of her in regard to Payne? A. He asked her if she knew ft. Was-she in the presence of Payne? A. She saw Mm-ii, , Q. what did she say? A. She held up her hands in this position, and said, "So help me God, I never saw him before, and I know nothingof him." Q. Do you recognize. Payne then as the man? A. That is the man yonder. CJ. And is that woman there Mrs. Surratt? A. lean- not see her face. , Assistant Judge Advocate Brihgbam then requested that Mrs. Surratt be asked to unveil her face, which had thevery natural effect of attracting to it the gaze of every spectator in the bouse; but; like Payne, she met the glance of the witness unmoved, and when he replied, "Yes sir, that's Mrs. Surratt," coolly and slowly replaced herveilbeforeherface. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— Did you make any searchhOf the premises while there? A. I did. CJ, What did yon find? A. I found a number of pho tographs, papers, bullet moulds, and some percussion caps. ft In which room did you find the percussion caps ? A. In Mrs. Surratt's room,, on the lower floor^ and I, alsodbund there the bullet mould., ft^.Werethe eapslyinglooseaboutinthe room? A. They "were in oneof t he bureau drawers, and the bullet mouldi was on the top of the wardrobe. CJ. Was this room on the first floor? A. It was the- baekrparloron thefirstflpor. Q What was the photograph you fbiind there? A. There were a number found there, but I dOfi't know whose likenesses they were. . -.- , Q. Did you find any of Davis or Stephens there, or any of the Rehel leaders?" A. Yes, but not exactly nhotographs; they were lithographs, cartes devisiteih 'lesamestyle as photographs. , CJ. AreVouawh,rethat-dealersexposetnes'e"for sale throughout the country? A. I, have- seen them in Baltimore eighteen months ago* but they were pro hibited* to be sold ' by the Commanding General at that time. Q. Have you not seen photographs of the leaders of the, Rebellion in the- hands; of persons known to be loyal? A. Not frequently. . _ Q. Well did you eversee them? A. Perhaps I did. Q, Have you everseen photographs of Booth in the hands of loyal men? A. Only in the hands of those who took an interest in-having him arrested. CJ* Is it not a common thing* for photographs of emi nent actors to be exposed for sale? Ar X think it is. ft. Whereabouts wereyou, when Mrs. Surratt made tbat observation? A. She was standing in the parlor near the hall door. QwWhat remark did you make to her when you were ready to t&ke her from the hoPse? A. Tbe remark was made by MajorSmith; he hadsent foracab. and when be said he was ready to take her away, she re quested him to wait a while, and She knelt and prayed alittle; she knelt down, but whether she prayed or not I can't say. , . . „ . • Q^ How was Payne dressed when becamein? A, Hewasidressed in a dark coat, arid pants that Seemed to be black; he had a close fitting head dress, appa rently a shirt sleeve, or the lpwer~ part of a pair of drawers, closely fitting around hishead, and hanging Qown^nthesidesixorseveninches^,. ft. Is that the article? A. It looks very much like- itrhewasfullof mud to his- knees. Cj-.Pb ,you think you could recognize the coat hehad ohif youshouldseeitnow? A^Yes. "ft. Do you recognize it now? is that tbe coat? A, L tbinkit was longer and darker Payne's hat was then, placed npon his head, apd bis overcoat removed, and then the Witness said, "That s the-coat, and that's the way hehadthehoad dress on." Q. Are you sure you recognize the man/ A. Yes sir; tbat is>the man. „ „ . ¦ _ . Q. Do yon think if you should see a person dressed in genteel dark clothes, with a-Wbite cravat about his neck, looking- like a. Baptist Mmister. and then see him three weeks after tbat covered with a shirt sleeve. on. his head and bis pants thrust in to ¦his- boots, you could recognize him a,s thesame? A. I declare I don t know how a Baptist Minister rtoes look. , , ft. You think you would . recognize aperson in such a change of Garh ina dim gaslight? A. if Iwere asked to look at him and identUyhinaT think I would; the phcthe Srlsoner had taken no particular pains to disguise imself; his face looked as it is now, and I would re cognize bin* i f he put another coat on and covered him self with mud. ft. Was there another remark made to you by Mrs. Surratt, with reference to Payne ? A. Nosir; even the ono mentioned was not made to me. Q. Did you see a black bagtherc ? A. Yes sir, I have seen it: it was not qpenedin my presence; we had no means of opening it, and wn had it sent to the Provost Marshal's office to be opened there. Q. Gfyour ownlkhowledge do you know anything tbat wasin it ? A. Nosir. By Judge Holt.— You f'Pund the bullet moulds on the top of the wardrobe in Mrs. Surratt's room? A. Yes sir. Q. When-Mrs. Surratt lpokedat Payne was there light enough lor hertosee him ? A. Where he stood, that- place was not only lighted by the hall light, but also by the 1 igh t from the parlors. By Mr. Aiken.— ft. Have you ever bad any percus sion cups in your possession? A. Yessir. CJ. Have you ever bad any bullet-moulds? A. I don't think I ever had. CJ. Isu'titacommon thing for people to keep them in these times? A. I don't know. Testimony of r-ieant. O. W. Demnsey. Q. Did you ever seetbis picture before? {The picture Was a- colored miniature representing three female figures, generally styled Spring, Summer and Au tumn.; A. I saw that picture in the house of Mrs. Sur ratt, in the back parior. CJ. Did you examine it? A. I did. CJ. What-didyou find underneath, between tbepic- ture and the back? A. A likeness of J. Wilkes Booth, aside-laceview. CJ. Isthatit? A. That is thesame face, but-the-pic- ture I found was a side view-. Objectedto,but objection notsustained. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— CJ. Have you ever beeninthe habit of seeling pictures of Booth, or the, leaders ofthe Rebellion exposed? A. I was a prisoner ' in the South fifteen months, and saw many ol the leaders of theBebeliion- personally andin pictures. CJ. I mean in the loyal States? A. Very lew, sir, ex cept in newspapers. ft. In loyal newspapers? A. Once, I think, a picture of Davis, as the former secretary of War, in one of the SuTidaypapersin New York. CJ. Haveyou not seen pictures of eminent actors ex posed for sale? A. I am not a theatrical character and can't say that I have never noticed it, but I have seen picturesof Forrest andMacready. Re-oxaani nation -of Wan. W» Reicnman. CJ. Look at the prisoner, Payne, and state whether you ever saw Ju im dressed up with that coat on beiore, A. Yessir, when he-last came to thehouse. ft-. When he remained three days? A. Yessir. Cj. State whether you ever saw that vest before. A. Yes sir; he also bad a pair of boots. ft. State whether he wore a white cravat, or not. A. He wore ablack cravat. ft. Did you ever k-nowhim to wear a white cravat? A, No sir.; I never did. Cross-examined by Mr. Doster.— Q. Allthishappened when you were giving'iDformation* to the War Depart- • ment, and on intimate terms with Mrs. Surratt audi herfamily? A. I was on intimate-terms foratime; it wason this occasion tbat Payne went -to the theatre with Surratt to seetheplay-of Jane Shore; I indicated my suspicions to Gleason-at tbe time, and the very morning after tbat the horseback ride took plaee. ft.. I was asking youtofix the data, that's all. A. It was aboutthel4th of March; hecainetofhe house on theevenihgof thel3th and remained there tbe 14th, lothandlGth ; onrthelgth, he went to the theatre; it was when Forrest played there four nights in that week. By Mr. Cox.— ft. So you fix the 16th as the date of that horseback ride? Yes sir % to the best of my recol- lectiant Testimony of Colonel E-I- ML Wells. ft. State to the'Court whether you had! Payne in your custody on the 19th of April. A., Yessir. ,Q. State whether you tookjiis clothes off. A. Yes; I took hiacoat, pants, Vest and all off of him. oh board themonitor. ft. State wbetherbe had a white shirt on. A. Yes sir. and an undershirt minus one sleeve; there is a> very distinctmark by which they caa be recognized; when I described to hirri hisstruggle with Mr; Seward Isaid/'IshallfihathebloPd here." andlf'oundit on thecbatsleeve'and also onthe-shirt sleeve. ftj Thewbiteshirt? A.- Yessir. (Tnenj the .witness took thesbirt.andsald, there it is, paint mg;totheblood stains.) Icalled his attention tait and Said, what do you say now? and he leaned agaiDst ihe-side of the boat andsaitL^pothlng; I also tookl roxa hims the boots tbat have been shown in court, and asked him where b^gotthem;heSaidinBaltimot« and thai he had worn , theriithlseemo.uthBjIcalledihJsatterxtioQro' the- feise1 hood 'apparent from their being.so>5it tic t?orrrT and pent them to the Treasury Department to sec if it was jjko- sihle to ascertain what the' time was. 73 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINaTON. Cross-examination by Mr. Doster. -^Q. You saw the blood on the. co it? A. Yes, on the sleeve. Q. On the outside? A. No, on the inside, on the lin ing of the left arm. i ft. D-d you threaten the prisoner at any time? A. No s.r. ' .- "ft. Did you not tell him he was a liar? A. I think I did .tell him. so several times; I called his attention to the'bloodon .thecpat and asked him how the blood came there, and he said he did not know bow it.came there. ft. How did you know it was blood? A. Because I saw it. < Testimony of Miss Rinse (Colored.) Q. State where you live. A. At Bryantown. CJ. Do you know Dr. Mudd? A. Yes sir. ft. How far does be live from Bryantown? A. Four miles. ft. State whether or not, on the day after the Presi dent was murdered, you saw bim riding into Bryan town. A. Yessir. ft. At what hour? A. It was In the evening, on a dark foggy day; I couldn't see the sun; it might be later tban three or four o'clock. -Q. Was he alone? A. There was a gentleman with him when he passed; they were on horseback. Q. How far from town do you live? A. Not more thanhalfarnile; they went past my place.- ft. How lpng beiore Dr. Mudd returned? A. In a short fime. , . L Q. How lpng after that before you went into town yourself? A. Not more than eight or ten minutes. Q. Did you find any soldiers? A. Yessir. Q.,Did you hear the murder spoken of then? A. Yes sir. 'ft. Was the other man with bim ? A. No sir. ft. Did you ever hear who shot the President? A. No sir; I did not; T only heard that he was shot, from persons talking. Cross-examined by Mr. Stone.— ft. If he had come the same road with Dr. Mudd would you not have seen him? A. I was notthereall the time. ft. HovvlongdidDr. Mudd stay in town? A. Ididn't think be stayed more than a quarter of an hour. ft. Can you tell whether theman with Dr. Mudd was aiiold'man orayoPngman? A." I could not say. Q. What sort ola horse had he? A. He appeared to be a bay horse. Q. Had Ihe soldiers been passing down there that day? A. I didn't see any till I went down tqwn, ; ,^ Washington, May 20. The first witness examined to-day was Assistant Sec retary of War Dana, as follows:— Testimony of Mr. C. A. Dana. Q. State what position you occupy in the Govern ment.' A. I am Assistant Secretary of War. Q, Look at the instrument before you, and state if you have ever seen It before. A. I took It out), of the office of Mr. Benjamin, the Rebel ' Secretary of State, in Richmond; I arrived in RicbmoPd on Wednesday t the 6th, and went into his office^ where this was found, and brought it away, with me, or rather, I sent it to Major Eckert, of the War' Department; I saw it was the key to an official cipher; there were many papers and things lying around there, and as this seemed to be interesting, I took it away. Q. Did ycu find it in a. trunk? A. Nosir; Benjamin's office consisted of a series of three ' or four rooms (I think four), Benjamin's personal office being the inner most of all; this was in the room next to his, occupied by his confidential secretary or assistant; most of tbe articles had been taken away; the record had been taken away, butl found several interesting documents, this amongst them. ' By tbe Court.— ft. I should like to know the object of the instrument. A. It is a key to a cipher, by which certain letters of the alphabet can be used for other letters, andby using these pointers such a cipher can be translated or plain writing turned into cipher by in terpretation. Note.— The machine Is about a foot long and eight inches high, and consists of a cylinder of wood, which has a paper envelope encircled with letters. . This cylinder revolves in pivot holes at each end, and a bar across the top contains wooden indices pointing dpwn to .the letters. Testimony of Major Ecfctcrt. ft. Look at tbat cipher,1 and state ifitwasfoundin the trunk of J. Wilkes Booth; compare it with this other cipher of which Assistant Secretary Dana bas just spoken., and state whether or not they are the same. A. They are the same, sir. ,ft. Yon are somewhat familiar, are you nptvwith these things? A. Yes sir. . ft? Yon have no doubt as to these being the same? A. None at all., sir. , ^ , . - O State whether or not cipher despatches have from time to time fallen into the hands of the War Depart- mept,apdbeen, referred to yqufPr examination. A. They have, sir. ' ,, . . ... ft. State whether they were tbe same cipher as this. A. Some of them were, sir; .they were wprkedson the same principle, . „_,, ,, , „ „ ft. I speak now ofthe despatches of the 15th and 19th of October laist: have you them now in your possession?, A. I have, sir. w ¦ft. These are the translations? Yes sir. ft. Have yopiheor^ginals? A. No sir; Ihaveccpies. ft. State whether they are written in the sanie cipher of which you have spoken, a. I think they are: they may be different in the key word, but the principle is the same. , ft. Have vou translated them ? A. The clerks have. ft. Were they worked out without any knpwledge of this instrumental the time? A. Yessir. Q. Are these translations of those despatches ? A. Yes sir. The following were then read :— October I3.i- We, again urge,the immense necessity of our gaining immediate advantages; strain every nerve for victory. We now look upon tbe re-election ' of Lincoln inNovember as almost certain, andweneed to whip his hirelings to prevent it. Besides, with Lin coln re-elected, and his armies victorious/we need net hope evenfor recognition, much less tbe help men tioned in our:last. Holcombe will explain this. Those figures ofthe Yankee armies are correct to a unit. Our friend shall be immediately set to work as you direct, October, 19, 1864.— YoPr'Ietterof the 18th Instant is at hand. There is yet time enough to colonize many voters before November. A blow will shortly be stricken here; it is not quite time. General Longstreet is to attack Sheridan Without delay, and then move North as far as practicable toward unprotected points. This will be made instead ofthe movement before mentioned. He will endeavor to assist the Republi cans in collecting their ballots. Be watchful and assist bim. Q. State whether the original was sent to its address. A b^yes sir ft. From what direction did the cipher of the 13th come? A. It came from Canada, and went to Rich mond. Q. From what direction did the cipher of the 19th come? A. It came. from Richmond and went to Canada. Testimony of General Hamilton. Q. State whether you are familiar with the hand writing of H. S. Oldham. A. Yessir; as familiar asl am with tbat'of any man living. ft. State whether that (.handing him a paper) Is in his handwriting or not. A. Yes sir. The following is the paper handed to the witness:— ¦ RiCHM0ND„Feb. 11, 1865.— His Excellency Jefferson Davis, President -Confederate States of America:— When Senator Johnson and myself waited upon you, 8oraedayssince,ln relation to the project of annoying and harrassing the enemy by means of burning their shipping, towns* etc, etc., there were several remarks made by you npon the subject that I was not fully pre pared to answer, but Which, upon subsequent confer ence with the* parties proposing the enterprise, I find cannot apply as objections to the scheme. First. The combustible material consists of several preparations, and not One alone, and can be used witb- outexposingthepartyusingthem to tbe least danger of detection Whatever. The preparations are not In- the hands of Mr. Daniel, but are m the hands of Pro fessor McCullough, and are knbwn but to him ard one other party, as 1 understand it. Second. Tbereis no necessity for sending persons in the military service into the-enemy's country; but the work may be done by agents, and in most cases by persons ignorant of the facts, and therefore innocent agents.1 pchave seen enough of the effects that can be pro duced to satisfy me that in most cases, without any danger ,to tbe parties engaged, and in others but very slight, we can:— l. Burn every vessel that leaves a foreign port for the United States. 2. We can burn every transport that leaves the harbor of New York or other Northern ports with supplies for tbe armies of the enemy in the'Soutb. 3 Burn every transport and gun-boat on the Mississippi River, as well as devastate the country and fill bis people with terror and con sternation. I am not ajoneln this opinion, but many other gentle men areas fully and thoroughly impressed with the Conviction as I am. I believe we have the means at our command, if promptly appropriated and energeti cally applied, to demoralize the Northern people in a very short time. For the purpose of satisfying your mind on tbe subject, I respectfully but earnestly re quest thatyou will have ap interview with General Harris, formerly a member of Congress from Missouri, who, I think, is able, by conclusive prools, to convince TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON, 79 you tha! what I have suggested is perfectly feasible and practicable,' Tbe deep interest I feel for the success of our cause in this struggle, with the conviction of tb ^importance ot availing ourselves of every element of defense, must be my excuse for writing you and requesting you to in vite General Harris to see you. If you should see pro per to do so, piease signify the time when it will be convenient for you to. see bim- I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, W. S. OLDHAM. On the hack of tbe letter are the two indorsements, the first being "Hon. W. S. Oldham, Richmond, Feb ruary 12.1S65." ft: State whether ornpt at the time of writing it be was a member of the Senate of the so-called Confede rate States from; Texas? A- I was present when be was elected by the Rebel Legislature pf Texas to a seat in the. Senate of the so-called Confederacy; since then I know it as a matter of public histpry; ,1 have seen many speeches, resolutions, and bills introduced by him into that Senate, and, published in the public prints. CJ. You are a citizen of Texas, formerly a member of Congress from there? A. Yes sir., CJ. Do you know the McCullogh mentioned in that letter? A. No sir, Testimony of Surgeon-General Barnes. CJ. State to the Court whether or not you made an examination of the body of B0oth after his death? A. Yes sir. ( Q. Describe to the Court the- scar which is mleged to have been on the neck and the general appearance* f the body? A. On the leftside pf the neckthere was a scar., occasioned by an operation' performed by Dr. May for the removal of a tumor; it looked like the scar from a burn rather than an incision. CJ. How near the ear was it? A. Three inches below the ear. t Testimony of Frank Rloice. ft. Where do you live? A. In Charles county. Q. In the town or country? A. IP tbe country, sir. Q. How far from Jiryantown? A. About half a mile. ft, Were you thereon therSaturday after the mur der? A. I was there on Saturday evening, about four o'clock: as near as I can come to the time it was be tween three and four. CJ. Didyou see Dr. Mudd there? A. Yes sir. CJ. What time do you think, that was? A. Between three and four, sir. CJ. Where did you see bim? A. He cameihto a store while I was there. , Q. State whetber tbe soldiers had arrived, from Washington then? A. I don't know, sir, whetber they had or not. ft. Were you around about the town? A. I was in the store when he came in: I did not take much notice. ft. What time/did you leave the store? A. About just before nighr. ft. When did he start? A. I didn't; see him when he Btarted; I did'nt tike much notice of him. By the Court.— Was the report of the President's as- assassination in Bryantown at that time? A. I don't know sir. Q. Did you hear it? A. No sir, I didn't bear until tbe roads were guarded; that was a little before night. Q. You heard it before yon. left Bryantown? A. Oh, yes sir. Testimony of J. h. Ward. ft.' State where you live? A. Near Bryantown, Charles county. ft. State whether you were there on the afternoon of i the day following the murder of the President? A. I was; I live in the suburbs of the village; I Went so soon as I finished my dinner, and arrived there about one o'clock ; and so soon as I arrived I observed the military were in town with Lieu tenant Murray, and perceived a great excitement, not opjy.with the military, but with tbe people, and I Imagined they were going to search the houses; a3 my wife was alone I went home lest she should be alarmed; a nigger came soon afterwards and said- Objected to. Witness.— I must explain the facts because I know but little; I left him and went to the village; Lieute nant Dana bad put the village under martial law, and thepcople were excited aboutgetting home. Q. Didyou see Dr. Mudd? A. I can'tsay, the excite ment was so great; I can't say I saw the Dr. ft. Wbat Is your opinion, to the best of your recol lection, about your having seen Dr. Mudd? A. I would not. like to say positively, but it occurs to me from faint memory that be was there; tbe excitement has been so great ever since that time that I cannot say positively. 4* ft. You say the military were there and tbe people were much excited, and you returned home; how long did you remain at home?' A. About three-qnar- ters of an hour. Q. Did you then hear of the assassination of the President? A. Yres, sir. ft. Did you hear who the assassin was? A. Yes, sir. Booth; some gave him the nanieoi Boose. A. Yes, ft. Did' you hear it everywhere spoken of? sir, at Bryantown I did ft. What time do yoP suppose vou heard it? A. It was, I tnink, between one and two o'clock* it was a cloudy day, and I never paid anv particular attention, but I think it was one and two o'clock. CJ. What time did you leave Br van town? A. I could not give you the precise time; it 'was between two and threp o'clock that I left tbe second time; it was then i found the military, and in a few minutes tkey told ma that the President had been assassinated, and I came back. CJ. Yousaysomesaid ItwasBoothandsomesaiditwas Boose that was spoken by some soldiers with whom tbe English language was not conversant? A. They would call him Borth. Booths and Boose: those who could speak audibly said itwas Booth; thosewhohad an amalgamation of tbe languages said itwas Booths. ft. Where were you when you first heard the Presi dent was assassinated? A. Athonie'; Iwanted to tell you it was through the authority ofthe darkey. ft. Who was the darkey? A. Charles Bloice, the brother of the fellow whose testimony has just been taken. Q. Did you ask him who assassinated tbe president? A. I have no knowledge of asking him, and I think he never tpld me. ft. In what direction from tbe centre of the town do yon live ? A. I live in the eastern direction, princi pally in thesuburbs. ft. On the road between Pine Town and Dr. Mudd ? A. I live close to the road leading to Bryantown. Q. My question is do you live near or on the road be tween Bryantown and Dr.|Mudd's ? A. No sir. - ft. .Is it your impression that you saw Dr. Mudd in the town? A. My impression is if it be Dr. Mudd that I saw, I saw him get on his horse; but I could not swear that it was Dr. Mudd. ft. Did you see the face of this person? A. No sir not that I know of; but I could tell him by a side or a back view* Q. Biow. close were you to him? A. About ten or twenty yards, standing on the porch of the store. CJ. You are only able to swear to a faint impression ? A. Yes, sir. ft. Wbat was the color of the horse this man was goingto? A. I, don't know./ CJ. Do you know the horse Dr. Mudd usually rides ? A. I have seen bim on a great many horses, and there was a great many horses connected there; I have seen him ride a bay horse. Q. Did you see Dr. Mudd when you first went into town? A. I think not. Q. Was it immediately on your arrival on the second time? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were youpersonally acquainted with Dr.Mudd? A. I have been for two years and five months, beiore that I had no personal acquaintance wi th him. Testimony of Lieutenant Dana. Q. State whether or not, on the day following tbe President's assassination, you were in pursuit of tbe assassins at Bryantown? A. Yessir. ft. State what hour you arrived there on that, day? , A. I sent an advance guard of four men. they arrived there twenty minutes or half an hour before I did ; I arrived there very near one o'clock that afternoon, Saturday afternoon. ft. State whether, on your arrival, the news of the assassinationwasapreadallaroundtbere? A. Yessir. ft. Was there any person mentioned, as the assassin? was J. Wilkes Booth? . A. Yes sir, and some of the citizens askedyme if I knew for certain It was he; as early as a quarter past — o'clock it was knpwn that the President was assassinated and who the assassin was. Q. Are ypu Acquainted at all with tbe prisoner at the bar, Dr. Mudd? A. Nosir. CJ. Have you any knowledge whether you met him on that occasion? A. No sir. Testimony of Robert Nelson (Colored). q. Do you live in Washington? A. Yes sir; I did live in "Virginia. ft. Lookat thatknife, and state whether you found it inthestreet,andifsoT when and where? . A.Itlooks like the one I found opposite to Secretary Seward's. ft. When did you. find it there? A. The Saturday morning after the Secretary was stabbed. ft. Did you find ifon the pavement or in the middle of tbe street? A. In the middleof the street. Q. Who did you give it to? A. Dr. Wilson. Cross-examination.— ft. You say it was the same one? A. I said it was one like it. Q. It was not in a sheath? A. No, it was not in a sheath at all. L „ A Ti ft. Was it in the street or the gutter? A. It was in the middle of the street. ft. Right in front of the door? A. Yessir. Q What time of day was it? A. Early in the morn ing- I was going to market; itwas about five or six, I think. Testimony of Dr. Wilson. Q. Doctor, look at that knife and state whether or not it is the knife you received from any one? A. This 80 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT : WASHINGTON. is tbe knife I received from the colored bov, just come from the stand, on Saturday, < about ten o'clock in the day. ;Q. OnthelSthof April? A. Yessir. Q.- Where did he give it to you? A. In the library of Mr. Seward; in the Seward library; he' brought it in the door afnd handed it to me. Testimony of Colonel J. Bfc Stewart. ft: State to the Court whetber or not you were at Ford's Theatre on th&night of the assassination. A. Yessir, I was. ft. Did you see the assassin -jump' from the- box ? -A. I did, at about 105 o'clock: I was sitting in' the front1 chair*nearth#-drchestra,on the right hafid side; there aire two aisles to the. orchestra, and my side was on the c'orner, ohthe left hand, right under and bringing me Immediately next to the music stand; atthe repprtof thepistoll was startled:' I'WaS speaking' to my sis ter, my head being turned to the Jeft; I glanced back to tbe stage: ¦ an exclamation Was rfiade'and a man leaped from the President's box, lighting-on-tbe stage. Hecanie down, with "his back slightly towards the audience, but as he was rising his fae& came fully in view; I' rose aud attempted toleap ohthestage; 1 made two or three steps on the railing to the right after alightmgfrom wher«I sat and keen- Ifig'myatfentipn on themab'Wbd had align tiduppn the stage and who Wad jumped from the President's' bPx; when ,1 reached the stage, on looking to the left 'I pefceiwd1 he had dfsappeared on the left hand egress; I- exclaimed1 "stop* that man," aind then- went past the length of the1 stage, and turning to the right, was at a distance of twenty feet from the door;- bpp the door was slammed to. I ran and gotto the-door very quick, but on com ing t» the- door'l'swung it the wrong wav, bub I remedied that and passed out; as I approached 'the door after I' had last ; said, stop that man I some ohesaid he has gone on a horse, and I heard the tramping of a horse; when I got out the door, I* perceived aV man' mountinTg a horse: he was at thatinstaut barely mounted; the' moon was just be ginning to rise, and reduldsee him better; the horse wasmovins; as though prematurely spurred in mount ing; Iranih the 'dfrection to which the horse was heaclincr, at about eight or ten fee't frOm the head' of the horse, and the rider brought him around to the right again:' the horse's feet were rattling violently on' the' RSofles;- I-crPssedln^besarne direction, and was now on the right hand side of the horse, but he was gaining on me; whehabout two-thirds of the way out of the alley lie brought the horse forward and swept to the left of P1 street: Tcomfifiafi'd'edli-im to stop* it all occu pied bpt. two-seconds. ft. You-fbuhd the door dosed; didyou see'anybody about the door? A. Idid.1 ft. One or more persons? A. I passed several in-the passage, .one or two m,en, perhaps five persons alto gether; bat near the door, on the right hantfside,! paissed a person standing, who seemed in the act of td-rning; I noticed everything; my mind is impressed w^th all that occurred, and I saw a person there who didn't seem to be movingabout. Q. Look at the prisoners and see if you recognize the man. A. I see hut one face that WOuld recall bim to my mind. ft. Which one? A. That one. By the Court.— Stand up, Spangler. Witness.— That one looks more like thb man than any other there. ft. Describe his appearance. Mr. Stewart here placed himself in an attitude, in order to show the Court the position In which he had seen the man, which wag a three-fourths view. Witness.— I didn't obsterve so far as to havea clear ..impression of his visage; be was turning from tbe door tdwards me. Cross-examination,— ft. Was it the passage way -be tween theseehe and the green-rbPm, about two and a half feet in width, through which- Booth ran? A. I don't know where the green-room Is; I "never was there, butifl had apian of trie building! could point it but. tJ , Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett then handed to Mr. Stewart a plan' of the' theatre by which heex- plained the roUtetaken by Booth and by himself, and on which he marked the spot where he had seen the man alluded to in the latter part of his examination in chief. Q. Whenyoogotoutof thedoortheperson was just rising into his saddle? A. Hewasinhis&addleleanin"- forward; hisleft foot apparently was in the-stlrrnp; he was leaning to« he left; the horse was leaving the walk in a sort of motion ma kill & apparently a circle: hewas sufficiently mounted to. go with the horse with out1 being* unbalanced; he was getting the horse under control for a forward movement. -¦'¦'¦ ft, Youicould not say then that hehad just got into' tbesaddle? A. He was balancing himself in- tnesaaV die; I would, form an opinion from biff position and tbjfe, motion; of his- -horse tbatttoe1 moment -he gotfhis-- foot into one stirrup he started the horse, who having therein drawn on one- Kidffraore^thftnrthe^t'iierdid not at once make a sU-aightfonvard movement. By ,Tud'4e IT.oK.-HJ. I understood yoil to'savthat all the.-persons yoii met with fn the passage as-you , approached exhibited great excitement, except this particular man? A. Every person.thatcame under my notice in the brief space of not oyer two or three seconds as I ran through the stage toward "the door were greatly agitated, and seemed literally be- , wildered, except the person near the door, who did not seem to be under the same excioemept. ' ByM'r. Ewing.— ft. IIow long did ' it take yen" after entering that passage , to1 get to the door? A. I can hardly timemyself; I was riinningas hard as I could, and was only obstructed by. passing these persons;. it seemect to me about as quick as you would count one, tWo,thMeVfdur;five. from tbereport of tbepistoluntil I reached the door; I knew the discharge of the pistol was either by afcident or design, and that it was by design Was solved by the mail jumping on the stage; ray impression was when- he came from the Presi dent's box that the President-had been assassinated; I was so much, under that impression that though _I had not heard a word after the person on thehors&had f one off, I informed the peoDle in the alley there that" he person who went off on tbat horse had shot, the President. ft. You say yori saw orlythe profile of this peraop in the passage? A. Theprohle'andfullfaceas he'passed roubd. ... By Judge Holt.— Q. Did yop recognize Booth when ypu saw brim on the Stage? A; Qh;yes; after I went' out and returned I -.took my family hqme, and irame^ diately ran,dbwn thef street towarastb'e' house pf Sec retary Stantori; but finding persons had been there, I turned anil went rapidly back to the pohce station; fpund Captain Richards, Superintendent of Policy: gave him my name and what information I had, and sard'Ho hina Ithought Iknevv who it was; I had knpwn Booth before by sight; some two years before: I was introduced to him one evening at. the Metropolitan Hotel; thenlhadseeh'him'Oii the stage, but I noticed himV more during tbe*past' winter ab the hotelVI was two evenings with some ladies at a hopatthe National Hotel. andnoticed th&' gentleman leisurely moving about the parlor; every.person except the ope I have. mentioned, seemed- to be' perfectly bewildered oh the stage; I felt very much vexed at bis getting away. , . . By theOourt.— How long was it after you heard the dporslam unti'lyou saw this man-' balancing himself in thfesaddle? A. Not more than while I wasrnaking two steps. ft. Are ypu satisfied tbat the door was clPSed'by some other person than the; one who went out of the door?. A. I could uotpossibljrbesatisfied of that; there was nothing to preclude the.possibility that the dPor was closed by'-BTibthhrmSelf.- Q. Are you satisfied that tbe person you saw inside the door was in a'positiou, had he been so disposed, to have interrupted tbe exit of Booth? A. Beyobd a doubt he was. Q; From his manner, he was cool' enough to have done it?- A: He showed no agitation like she other neu ' pledltf".- By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Were not the other persons you ' have spoken 'Of also in a position to have interrupted theexit of Booth? A. O yes, at least at the moment I saw them every person I met cqfcfd have obstructed my 'motion, except one person, 'vino was three or five feet off to-tbe right; that was the person I described who seemed to be passing-off. ft. Then the person you speak of nearest the door was. in- no better position to have cbfttructed the p1 assa°-e of^Booth than any of the others, so far as you know' A. None whatever* .'--.. ' By the Court,— Q; Could this man nearest the door hSve opened it and gone out before you went out' 4 Yes,th,edoor was inimediately within the controlof tbe person who stood there. By"jlr. Ewing.'— Q. Do yonknow whether any person on the stage, or in the passage us you went out. knew that the assassination had been committed* A I can not say that; ^hey acted very much like people as tounded at something that bad just occurred. Testimony of Robert A. Campbell. ExarninedhyJudge Hdlt.— ft. State where you re- side? A. Montreal, Canada. ft. Are' you or not connected with the Ontario Bank ofthatcity? A. I,am,asfirstteller. ft. Look ubPn that account, and state whetber or not it is a correct abstract from the books of that bank* A; Itte; I examined it before I cameaway Q. What is it? A. It is the account of Jacob Tbomn- son with the Ontario Bauk, Montreal. CJ. State, on what day the account commences* A The account commences May 30tb,lBii4; prior to that* however, he left sterling exchange, drawn on the Rebel agents at Liverpool 6r London for collection- as soon asragents advised us of the bills beingpaid the proceeds were placed to bis credit; the first advices we had was May ,3C^ and two thousand pounds sterline wasthe'aniaunt. , ** * o&fl%ttn^eacebaM V**"*1 A' The aoo otl. Q. Had he dnjwn lately to any considerable extent? TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 81 A- He-has drawn ^ano,f)00 ,veiy nearlv since Marcb ' he^bopgbt at <.ne time $HW.y0.q in sterling eNQhanqe. ft. State the amount drawn opt between the istand; Mth of April? A. The first fntrv in April is pn the 4th,a very small chrqk cf ?10»; there is a deposit re ceipt under date of 6th of April, of *lsu,puo which was tobe paid when presented; on the 8th of April He pur chased 440 pounds sterling "exchange, and also 4000 poundssterlin.Ton tbesamedate; onthe24th of'March he purchased $IO0,CQ;isterllng.' QL You know Jacob Thompson personally? A, Yes. I know him. ft. State whether or nptsince the 14th of April last he has left Montreal? A, He has; I heard him say myseuhe was, going away, and I know he has not been seen in the .bank- lately; one of the lasttrnnsac tions wa3 a check given tp a hotel keeper for, as I sup posed, board: he said hewas going overland to Hali- Tax, en route to Europe. Q. Can you fix the . Q. State whether he was 'Sensible or insensible. A; He bad /difficulty in articulating; he wanted to say Something but could not express himself, he knew me perfectly well; he had a smile of recognition on bis lips; as I was looking at his wound on the forehead he was evidently impressed that the severest one was on the back part of his head; be commenced moving his lips and pointing his finger there: I examined his wound and fbund hiaskull broken; Isaid, Do you want to know wheth er your skull is - broken or not. and he assented: he remained sensible for half an hour and then went into asleep: he woke up in about twenty minutes, when hewas put to bed, and was very soon insensible. ' Q., Did you also give the information, after examin- ing'the elder Seward, whether the wounds wereraor- tal.ornot? A. Yes, wheulcameinto theroom where he was, I found terror in the expression of all hjs family, they 'evidently supposing his wounds were mortal; I examined him, and immediately reported to the family that, bis- wounds were not mortal, upon which Mr. Seward stretched out his hands, manifest ing evident satisfaction . Q. How long was 4t before Dr. Barnes made his ap pearance? A. Probably twenty minutes. CJ. Was, or was not Mr. Seward at the time of this attack in a critical condition ? A. Nosir; he had im proved very mufch from bis former injury, when his jaw was broken. Q. State what the effect of these wounds were upon Mr. Seward in 'reference to his former condition. A The effect was to debilitate bim and to make it still more difficult for bim to rally. Q. Have you not at some time before this trial stated that the wounds received by Mr. Seward had a ten dency to aid in his recovering from the former injury ? A. Np sir; I have heard that such an opinion was ex pressed, but I do riot know by whom; that was not my , opinion. r .Re-ex ami nation of John Borrow, alias "Peanuts." By Judge Bingham. -Q. State whether or not yon .were working at Ford's Theatre in January last. A. Yessir, I was. Q. .State If you know the stable in tbe rear of tbe theatre roccupied by Booth's horses and carriage. A. Yessir. ^ ft. Who fitted it np? A. Tbe prisoner, Spangler. and a man by the name of Jones. Q. Did he do that in January last, and before Bopth put his horses in there? . A. Yes sir Q- ^]iaid!^ he rI° t0 the' stable? A. It was raised up a little behind and stalls put in; a carrlaee room was also prepared. • ^ ft. Was.Booth there at the time he was doing if A. He was there sometimes. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.-Q. Did Booth oc- tKJSft'8?^?1'*? ? S^^ horses 'roni that time on? A. Yes; first he had a horse and saddle there; then he sold that horse and got ahorse an! ^By Judge Bin gbam.-Q. When was tbat bnggysold? dered Wednesday beiore the President was mur- &tff^S2fJ.Lt? ,f $ea SP"1*1**. *he prisoner. a ?rS?nn^f^CQ; ?i° lon k°ow who he sold it to? A. He took it down to,thebazaar,wherethevsell horses and 2?SXS5 &Y, he'could not 'get VlSffi f wanted! ^ sohe^old it to a man who.keeus a livery stable s.ft. DidyougowitbSpanglertota'keit.Sowii? A. Yes ft. Did not Booth and' GhTortf tell Spangler on Mon day to take it to tbe bazaar to sell? A. Yel; on the TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 83 Monday before it was sold they told him to, and I went out and cleaned it off. Testimony of James Maddox. By Judge Bingham.— Q. Were you employed at Ford\s Theatre last winter? A.Twas'. ft. State ^ho rented the stable for Booth in which he until the next mornWSn? t ™™,i hf cent his horses un to the time of the Prpsirtont.'* ™ "c ¦ Wt™ r ".* ^^S^1.?? **J recollect, kept hia horses up to the time of the President's mur der. A . I did. -ft. When did you rent the stable? A. 1 think IP De cember last. Q. From whom? A. From Mrs. Davis. ft. For whom? A. For, Booth. ft. Who pUid the rent, and how was it paid? A I paid it monthly. CJ. Who furnished the money? A. Booth ft. Wereyoupresentattbedecorationofthebox on Friday alternoon. the 14th of April last, occupiedbv the President? A. I was there at the time Q. Do you know who decorated it? A. I saw Harrv Ford decorating It. ft^Didyousee anybody else? A. I do not remember anybody else; there may have been.others there Q. Do you know who brought the rocking-chair in which tbePresident sat. to the box that'aayf A Ido not; I saw tbe colored man, Joe Semms, with it on his bead that afternoon, coming down from Mr Ford's room. ft. Youdidnotseewhoputitintothebox? A. Nosir Q. Have you ever seen that chair in the box before? A. Not this season; tbe first time the President came ' there we put it in; that was in 1863. Q. And you do not know of its being there before for two years? A. Nosir. ft. Were you in the box that day? A. Nosir; Ihave not been in that box since 1863. : Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— ft. What has been your business at Ford's Theatre? A. Property man. Q. Did your business require yon-to be on 'the stage , while the performances were going on? A. Yes, when there was anything to do. ft. What is your position on the stage? A. It is to see that the properties are put On right, and to give to the actors the property required tobe used in the play. ft. Wbat part of the stage did you occupy? A. My room is on the stage, and I have nospecial position. ft. Do you know the passage-way by which Booth escaped? A. I was shown the passage-way; I did not see him escape. Q. State whether it is customary, during the perform- w ance, to have that passage-way clear or obstructed' A. It is generally clear; I have never seen it blocked; when we are playing a heavy piece we generally have .to run flats m there pretty well, but it is generally clear. ft. Is tbe American Oousin a heavy piece? A. No sir. Q. Duripg the play of the American Cousin would the passage through, which Booth made his exit properly be clear? A. Yes; It would properly be clear. , ft. Where was the prisoner Spangler's ppsition? A. On the left-hand side of tbe stage; the side ofthe Pre sident's box; he always has been on' that side since I haye been in the theatre. ft. Did you seeSpangler that night? A. Yessir. ft. State at what time you saw him during the per formance. A. I saw him pretty nearly every scene; If he had not been there'i should certainly have missed him: Ido not recollect seeing bim away from, his posi tion at all; he may have been away, but if he had been when a sceue.chapgedsome other person would have ' bad to run his flat; every person would have been In quiring where Be was., ft. If he bad been away for what length of time? A. If he had missed one scene they would have all known it; one scene sometimes lasts two minutes. ft. In the third act in the American Cousin are not tbe scenes shifted frequently? A. Yes, there are seven scenes in that act, as Miss Keene plays it. , ft. Would it have been practicable for Spangler to nave been absent during the performance of that act for fivepiinutes without bis absence being noticed? A. Yes sir. ft. ^Wppld it have 'been for ten minutes? A. Yes. at particular times his absence for five minutes would nave been noticed; during the second act.thescene does not change for about halfan(hour; at one time duripg tbe third act tbe scenes are pretty rapid. Q. Were you at the front of tbe theatre during that play? a. In the second act I was in the box office. ft. Were you on the pavement? A. I went out the alleyway, and had to goon to the pavement in getting Into the office. Q. Did you see Spangler there? A. Nosir; I did not Q. Have you ever seen Spangler wear a moustache?. A. No; .pot since I have known him, and I have known bim two years next month . ft. Where were you at the moment the President was assassinated ? A. At the first entrance leading to the left band box. ft. Did you see Spangler there shortly , before ? A. Yes sir; I think I did; I saw him in his proper position as I crossed the stage after the second scene of third act was on. Q. Hew lpng was that before the President was as- flassinated? A. I think about three or four minutes; I will uotstate positively; it could not have Iieen long. sn?ln?innt?0« heard the pistol fired did you see Booth wbenffhPh£3 *ho stage?. A. I did not; I saw him first WW? had nearly passed off the stage, fo?w?t^7nSrirTn,an?;him? A. I heard .them calling n ™?%5nd * w cllt; t0 m^ room for thai. SiiTJS'^^L^^^^er that? A. I did not ft.. Did you hear Booth that night when herodeiro to tbe theatre call for Spanker? A. N^sir I dkl no? bo^wSfBff1!?^"^ H° yon knVw8whethSfiS £^eS^ S^not^oV' WaS °CCUpied °r Q. Do you know whether anv o£ the other boxes rttem werePled "^ nighK A" ldo »°» ">^ 'any ft „.S- ?° [yoa nP^ k°Pw tbat "»ey were not? A. I could not state positively whether they were or not; I aid R*aA^ ™y.not"=e excTOt as to the President's box. p5?HrrVEwlnj?-~Q- Wilen ii& >'ou flIS* heM that the President was to come to the Tueatre that night' A About twelve o'clock that day. Q. Who told you? A. Harry Ford. *„Qi DoyO"fenow whether, the Preside!** was invited to be present that night? - A. I do not; a young man employed at thePresicEent's house told me that night that h e had heen down there that morning to engage Testimony of Lien tenant s£. Hartley. 'By .Judge Holt.— Q. State whether you have been in the military service, and if so in what position. A. I have been in the Signal Corps of the Army since ^i.UgUSt, looo. Q. State whether you have been a prisoner of war, ano- */ so arwhat time. A. I was a prisoner at Bich mond during a portion of. tha year 18C4. * $.-. A£ what prison? A. A part of the time at Libbv, while I was in Richmond, and in otherprisons at other Q. State whether or not,' during tbat time, you had occasion to observe that the Libby Prison ¦3l beeri mined by the Confederate Authorities, with a view of, exploding it if the city was captured by Federal troops. A. When we were first taken to Libbyj we were informed, when taken into the hall, that nhe place had been mined; on thenextmorningwewerfetakeninto adungeonin the cellar part of the building; in going to the dungeon we bad to go round a place of fresh dirt in the centre of tbe cellar; the guards would not allow any person to pass over or near it; on inquiry why we were told there was a torpedo buried there; that remained there while wewereinthedungeon, and some time alter we had been taken up stairs.* Q, Did you nave an opportunity to examine tbe tor pedo? A. No, it was not opened while we were in the dungeon, we learned from officers who had charge that a torpedo was there. ft. Did they speak of one or more? A. One: it was spoken of as the torpedo. ft. Frppi the appearance of the ground and tbe place dug-put, wPuld you have supposed it to be a large or a small torpedo? A. The excavation apparently, from the fresh dirt dug out and put, back again, was perhaps six feet in'diameter. Q. Was that directly under the prison? A. Yes sir; directly under the, centre of the prison. Q. Did they explain to ,you the object for which it had been placed-there? A. Yes; different persons, in conversation, told us the prison had been mined, on account of the raid pear the city, under the command of Dahlgren; they said if the raid succeeded, and tbe prisoners were in danger of being liberated, "they would blow us up. Testimony of Colonel R. P. Treat. By Judge Holt.— ft. State your position in the ser vice. A. I am Chief Commissary of the Army of the Ohio, on General Schofiefd's staff. Q. Have you been on duty recently in North Caro lina? A. I have. Q. State whether or not the army with which you were connected there captured several boxes said to contain the, archives of the so-called Confederate States. A. Yes, they were surrendered by General Joe Johnston to. General Schotie-ld at Charlotte, North Carolina. , , Q. State under what .circumstances they were de livered to you by, General Johnston. A. I think a letter wassent frpp} Johnston, at Cbarlotte, toGeneral Scbofield, at Raleigh, stating tbat he had in his posses sion, at Charlotte, the archives of tbe War Depart ment of the Confederate States of America, and, that he was ready to deliver them, to General Scbofield on his sepdipg an officer to receive them ; the following day an officer of Scbofield's staff went for them and brought them to Raleigh ; from that point they werai sent to Washington, and came in my charge. ft. To whom did you deliver them hero? A. To Major T. D. Eckert, of the War Department. Q. Were those boxes labeled so as to designate the contents of each ? A. Most of them, were. Testimony of Major T. J>. Ecltert. By Judge Holt.— ft. State whether pr not you received and examined certain boxes purporting to contain the 84 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. archives ofthe War Departmentof theso-called.Confer derate states- of America. A. I did receive them yes terday morning, and they- have been opened by my di rection, and to a certain extent have undergone exam ination by Mr. F. H. JBCalli » ''. Testimony of F. IE. Hal J. By Judge Holt.— Q. State whether or not you fiaVe opened certain boxes delivered- to you by Major Eckert as containing the archives of *tie so-called Confederate States of America. A. I have. ¦'• . ' ¦¦ j Q---Look at that ¦ paper and- state ¦whether it was found in one of those boxes. A; Yes,T recogrtjae it as on© of the papers found. The paper referred to -was read to the Courfby Col. Burnett, and is as follows:— ¦Montgomery, Whit? S-tjlphtjr Sprinos, Va. To His Excellency the President of the Confederate States of America.— Dear Sir:— I'have beep thipkjng, -for some time I would make this communication' to ¦yoit,jbut bave been debarred from doing so on account of 111 health. I now oj&%r you my* services, and if you! wUl favor fne in mydesigns,! will proceed as soon as mvbealth will permit, -to rid my country of some qf ¦her deadliest enemies; by striking; atthe very heart's ¦blood of those who seek toencnain'ber in slavery. I consider nothing dishonorable having sucb ,9- tendency. All I want of you is to favor me "by, granting, the necessary -papers, etc, to travel! on' while within tbe jurisdiction of this Government.! I am perfectly familiar With the North, and feelconfi-i pent that I can execute anything I undertake. 4 have 5ustrel'urned now from' within their lines. lama lieutenant in General Duke's command. Iwas.qna •raid last June in KeiltPpkyV -under General JohnH. Morgan. T and all my comrpand, except two or.thre'e commissioned officers, were taken prisoners, bpt find- ingagoodopportunity while beingtakeri to prison', I made my escape from them in the garb-of a citizen. I attempted to pass out through tbe mountains^ bpt find- i-ng.th'at impossible, narroWly 'escaping two or three times being retaken, I directed my course North, and South through the Canadas by the assistance of Colo nel J. P. Hol'combe. I succeeded iu making ,my way round through the blockade; but having taken the yellow fever at Bermuda, I have been rendered unfit for service since my arrival. 'I was reared up in the State Of Alabama, and educated at its University. Both the- Secretary of War and his Assistant, Judge Campbell, are personally acquainted with my father, Wm. J. Allston, ot the Fifth Congressional District of Alabama.liavmgservedin'the timeofthe old Congress in the years 1649,1850 and 1851. If I do anythingforyoii I shall expect your lull confidence in return. If you give this lean render you and my country very im portant service. Let me hear from you soon. I am anxious to be doing something, and having no com mand at present, all or nearly all being .in garrison, I desire that you favor me in tbis.a short time. I would like to have a personal interview with you in order to perfect arrangements before Starting1. " I am; Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Lieutenant W, ALLSTON. (Address me at these -Springs, in hospital.) On '-the -above letter were the following indorse ments.— 1. Brief of letter without Signature, 2. Respectfullyref'erredby-airection of the President to the Honorable Secretary of 'War. (Signed) ' BURTON W.JHAR!RISON, Private Secretary. Beeelved Nov. 29th, 1864, Record Book A. G. O. Dec 8th', '1064. 'third A. G., for attention. By order J. £. Campbell, A. S. W. - By Mr. Aiken.— ft. From which box did ycii Obtain tbat letter? A. From fhe box marked "Adjutant- General's office, letters received from July tp ^Decem ber, 1864." Re-examination of William E. Cleves. ft. State to the Court whether you have examined the horse you were from here sent to see. A. Yes sir. : Q. In What stable? A. At General Augur's head quarters. ft. Is it thesame horse that Arnold ; bought from Booth? A. Yessir. '( ' to an error in fthe record. OnMonday[Marshal,MpPbail presented the form of the' oath of' allegiance, and judged it bore the signa ture of Mr. O'Laughlin, but thewitness had not suffi cient knowledge of Jthe -handwriting to swear to it po sitively, therefore it was not received as evidence, aad was ruled put by the Judged Advocate. He 2. By Mr. Ewing.— ft. At what time did you see tbe prisoner dressed in Rebel uniform? A. I think it was in 1861; I cannot say positively. Testimony of John Ii. Caldwell. By Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett.— Q. Where do you reside? A, At Georgetpwn, ft. State where you were on the mornlngof the assas sination ? A. At Mathews & Company's grocery store, in Georgetown. Q. State whether you saw at that time anyof the prisoners at the bar, and which one. A. I saw that one, Atzeroth, at about 8 o'clock; he came into the store; I asked him how he, was, and so on; be told me be was going into thecountry, and asked me whetber I did not want to buy his watch; I said no; I had no use for one; he then asked me tb lend him ten dollars; I told him I had not the money to spare; he then took out his revolver,, and said lend me" ten dollars andtake this as security; I will come back next week and return you the money; Ithoughttherevolverwasgoodenough security, so I loaned him the money. A revolver was shown to the witness, which ha recognized as the one referred to. It was loaded when be received it, but had the appearance of having been fired once. Testimony of Mary Simtns (Colored.) By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— ;ft. State whether youknow anyof tbe prisoners. A. I know that one, Dr. Samuel. Mudd. Q. State whether you were his slave, and lived with bim. A. I was his slave, and lived with him four years; I left him about a month before last Christmas; I was free then. ft. When you lived with the prisoner did you hear him say anything about President Lincoln? A. I heard him say when he (President Lincoln) came in here he stole in in tbe night, dressed in women's clothes; that they laid in wait for him, and that if they had caught him they would nave killed him. ,rQ.Statewho visited him. A. A man by the nameof Surratt visited him; also, a man named Walker Bowie. ft. Who called this man Surratt? A. Dr. Sam. Mudd and Dr. Sam. Mudd's wifecailed bim Surratt. ft. State the appearance of the man Surratt. A. He was young looking, rather slim, neither very tall nor Short; his hair was rather light, at least not black. ,Q. State where he slept when at Dr. Mudd's bouse. A. All Of bis men slept in the woods. Q. State how many were with him when tbey slept in the woods. A. There was Captain White, from Tennessee; Benjamin Gwin, Andrew Gwin and George Gwin. . , Q. How did they get victuals to eat while they were in the woods? A. When Dr. Mudd went in the house with the men to get his meals he i ut us out atthe door to watch if anybody, came along: then at other times he would send me with victuals down, and then stand behind a tree to watch when the Rebels would come out and get them. ft. Did you ever see Surratt in the house with Mudd at any other time than when hewas eating? A. Yes sir; when they wanted to talk they always went apart by themselves. ft. Where did tbey go to ? A. Upstairs in a room. Q. State how you knew tbat the men whocame there were Rebels. A. They would often bring letters from Virginia. ft. To whom did tbey bring the letters ? A. To Dr. Sam Mudd. ft. State whether be would give them letters to take back. A. Yessir; and clothes and socks. , ft. What sprt of clothing were these men dressed in ? A. Some of them whom they called officers and soldiers would have epaulettes on their shoulders, and were dressed in grey coats and grey pants, trimmed with yellow. Q. Did you bear Dr. Samuel Mudd say anything about sending any body to Richmond? A. I heard him say something about sending my brother to Rich mond; when be bought my brother be said he would have something for him to do in Richmond. , ft. What did be say be would have, for him to do? A. To build batteries. , ., , ft. Was your brother his slave?" A. Yessir. The cross-ex aminati op of this witness, which was conducted by Mr. Ewing, did not elicit any point of general interest. In regard to tbe prisoner, Mudd's remark that Presi dent Lincoln would have been killed, if caught, the witness testified that tho remark was made four years ago. ihe man Walter Bowie was but only one of the visitors who slept in the house; the others remaining in the woods. Surratt amoug them, on beds made upon bed clothes procured at Mudd's house; Surrattfre- quently took dinner at tbe house, but was notseen by more than one other servant; he commenced coming last winter. & Testimony of Eleazer Eg-lin. By Judge Holt— Q. Do you recognize the prisoner. Dr. Samuel A. Mudd? A. I do. Q. Were you his slave? A. Yes sir; I left bim in August. 18G3. ft. State whether he said anything to you about send- ingyou to Richmond. Mr. Ewing objected to the question on tbe ground that it was irrelevant. Judge Advocate Holt said the object of the question was to show disloyalty on the wart ot the accused. The objection was overruled and the question re peated. A. He told me that when I got so that I could travel he would have a place for me in Richmond. ft. When was that? A. In June, 186$. Q. State if you saw any men about Dr. Mudd's house when you were there, if so, where they staid? A. I saw some men there, and some of them staid in the woods in the daytime. Q. Where did they get their victuals? A. Ido not know. ft. Didyou see any victuals being taken to them? A, I saw victuals going that way often enough; I saw my sister, Mary S.imms, taking them. ft. How were these men dressed? A. Some in grey, and some in black clothes. ft. Who was present besides yourself when Dr. Mudd said he was going to send you to Richmond? A. No person. Testimony of Sylvester Eglin. By Judge Holt.— Q. Did you live with Dr. Samuel A. Mudd? A. I lived with his father, about a quarter of a mile off. Q. State whether you heard bim say that he was go ing to send anybody to Richmond. A. I heard him say that he was going to send Eleazer, and me, and several others, to Richmond. ft. To whom was he talking at the time? A. To Jerry Dyer and Walter Bowie. ft. Where did the conversation take place? A. Down by my old master's gate-, in the oats field, where the horses were kept. Testimony ot Ii. Washing-ton (Colored.) By Judge Bingham.— Q. Do you know tbe prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd? A. Ido. , Q. Were you his slave? A. Yes. Q. When did vou leave his house? A. This October coming two years. ft. state if while you lived with Dr. Mudd, you heard him say anything about President Lincoln. A. I heard him say he would not keep his seat long; I heard him say that some time summer before last. Q. Was anybody talking with him at that time? A. There was a heaD of gentlemen in the house; I do not know who they were. ft. How were they dressed, and where did they sleep? A. Some had on grey clothes, some little short jackets, with apeak behind; Sometimes tbey slept in thehouse, sometimes down in tne pines, not very far from the spring. - Q. State hoi.v they got their victuals. A. Sometimes Dr. Mudd would carry it: sometimes the girl (Mary Simms); I did, not stay about the house, but I hap pened to be there One day as they were setting down to dinner; Dr. Mudd set the children tP watch while they were at dinner; the children said they were com- • ing, and these men jumped up from the table and ran out the side door. £ Q. Did you hear Dr. Mudd say anything about send ing any one to Richmond? A. Yes; he said to one of the men, one day, that he would send him to Rich- niond. Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— ft. Howmanytim.es did you notice these men in the woods? A. They were there for a week or more, and I saw them seven or eight times; tboyall then went away together in the night. Q. Do you know their names? A. I think one was Andrew Gwynne; I do not know the names of the Others. Q. Were they ever there at any other-time than that week? I did not see them at any other time. ft. What other person saw them there? A. The wo man, Mary Simms, who was on here just now, saw them; her and another woman were in the room; I don't know any white person who saw them, except Dr. Mudd and his wife. Q. Did Mr. Best see them? A. I do not know. ft. Did any of the field hands or any of tho neighbors see Uioin? A. I do not know of any. 88 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON: .Q. Where were the horses of these men kept? A. Tbey kept their horses in the stable; sometimes Milo and sometimes Henry Ham. ft. What time in the summer, was it you saw them there?, A. I think it was about August. Testnnfioray of Millo Simms (Colored.) Examined by Judge Bwigham— ft. State whetber you lived with the prieouett Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. A. Yes, I was 'his slave;' I left his house the Friday before last Christmas. " ft, -State ' if at any time while you stayed at Dr. Mudd's house you saw any men there. A. I saw two or three there last summer. Q. Where did the men stay? A. Sometimes in the house, and then down by the spring among the bushes; they slept down among the bushes. Q. Did you see the bed down there? A. Yes; It was fixed under a pine tree, with a blanket, and rails at the head. ft. Where did they get their victuals? A. Prom Dr. Mudd's; sometimes my sister carried it to them; some times they carried it their selves. 1 ft. When your sister carried it where was it put? A. Down by thespriug, • ft: Who took it!aWay? A. Sometimes John Surratt, sometimes one of tbe others. ft. How did you' know jGhn Surratt? A. I heard them call him at the house. Q. What kind'of a looking man was be? A. He bad light hair and whiskers and was a slim man. Q. When there were men in the house was anything said by Dr. Mudd about watching? A. He set some children to watch who was coming; if anyone was coming they wereto^tell him. Q., Do you know whether anything was Baid about any one coming while these men were In the house? A. I do not. Q. How were they dressed? A. They, had on grey clothes with brass buttons. ft. State if you heard any talk between Gen. Gard ner and Dr. Mudd about Mr. Lincoln. A. Yes: I heard Mr. Gardner say ''Lincoln was son of a — , and ought to have been killed long ago;" Dr. Mudd said, "yes, that-was much after hismind;" that was some time last fall Cross-examined by Mr. Stone.— Q. Did you work in tbe house or in the field? A. In the field, bpt some times when I was at the house I took tbe horses. ft. How old are you? A. I reckon' about fourteen years. Q. Would you know John H. Surratt if yon were to see bim? A. I don't know as I would now. Q. Wbo'pointedbimonttoyou? A. Dr. Mudd would say, "take Mr; Surratt's horse and Carry him out to the stable and feed him." ft. How often did you see him? A. Two or three times. , Q. How many came with bim? A. Two or three. ft. Where was it that you heard this talk between Mudd and Gardner? A. AtBeantown. ,; Q. Horn far is Beantown from your house? A. About three miles; I went up with him after some liquor last summer., ' Q. Was there anybody eise there besides Mr. Gard ner arid Dr. Mudd? A. There were some men in there but I did'nt know them. Q. Was not Andrew GWynn there with Surratt? A. Not as I know of; I saw him at Dr. Mudd's father's house; I never saw Andrew Gwynn at Dr. Mudd's house. Q. Who was with Andrew Gwynn? A. Jenny Dyer. Q. When was tbe last time you saw John Surratt at Dr. Mudd's? A. Last winter. Q. Did he stay all night? A. Yes. Testimony of Win. Marshall, (Colored.) By Judge Bingham.— ft. State whether you were the slave of and lived with Dr. Samuel A. Mudd A I married near him. ft. Do you know Ben. Gardner, one of his neighbors? A. Yes, Ben. Gardner was my wife's master. Q. State if you heard any conversation between Gardner and Dr, Mudd about the battles on the Rap pahannock. A. Yes; I heard Mr. Gardner sav to Dr Mudd, Sam., we gave them — down on the'Rappa- bannock.' The Doctor said "Yes we did." Gardner said that *;01d Stonewall was the best of the Generals;" Doctor said, "Yes, he was quite a smart man;" Gard ner said that "Lee bad gone round up into Maryland: that be was gomg to cross the river at the Point of Rocks, repiember that, and he would not be surprised iitheywere there now;" he said that "iu a short time he would take the Capita1, and Washington, and have Old Lincoln burned up in thehouse;" Dr. Mudd said "He would not be surprised." AQHStcfd whether ***¦ Mud<3 made any objection. Testimoany of Rachel Spencer (Colored). By Judge Bingham.-^Q. State whetber you were" a sl-ive ofthe prisoner, Dr. Mudd. A. I was; I left bim In January last. ' "1U1 ft. While you were at Dr. Mudd's house did you see men come there at times? A. Yes, at the time men sif oamelhere US th*Ve laSt summer> aome fi™ or ft. What sort ofa dress did they wear? A. Abjack or blue: they slept ip the pines, about twenty yards from the house, near the spring. ft. Where did they get their victuals while they were there? A. At the house, and sometimes Dr. Sam took 'the victuals to them, ft. When they would pome into the house, did he say anything to any of tho servants or b.oys, u bout wbat tbey were to do? A. I was in the kitchen; theysidd they had-tpgo tu the.door and watch. Q. I id, you hear the names of any) pf the men who called at Dr. Mudd's house? A. Yes; Andrew Gwynn and Walter Bowie. ft. Did you see a young, man among those who visited there? A. Yes; he'sl'ept in the pines, too.when they were tb ere, last summer. ft. Describe his appearance! A. He was not very tall; he was fair looking and slender, Q. Do you remember his being there more thap once lastsummer?, Ar. I do not. ft. Do, you remember1 hearing Dr, Mudd say any thing about Richmond? A. I heard1 bim tell one of hismenhe would, send him to Richmond. Cross-examined by Mr. Stone— ft. You say you saw them there in the summer; was it the first of the summer or the- last? A. I do not know; it was warm weather; they all eame together and went together; 1 believe theystaid at the Spring about a week. Q. Where were their horses? A, Inthestable. ft. Was Mr. Best living there that year.? A. Yes; to the best of my knowledge he came there the winter before. ¦ • ft. Doyou know whether Mr. Albion' Brooke was living there at the time these men were there. A. Yes he was. Q. Did Mr. Best and Mr. Brooke also see these peo ple? A. Yessir. By Mr. Bingham. Vft. Do ypu know whether Albion Brboke ever saw them or not, or didyou merely sup pose he did? A. He saw them. Q. Did he tell you he saw them or how did you know it? A. He used to go with them ; they were all to gether. - Q. Do.you know whether Mr. Best ever saw them or not? A. I am notppsitive whether he did or not. Tbe Judge Advocate-General here stated that, re- serving„the right to introduce further testimony on the general subject of the Conspiracy, the prosecution would here close. TESTIMONY FOK THE ©EFEWSK. Mr. Aiken stated tbat by agreement amongthe coun sel for the defense they would first introduce testimony in behalf of Mrs. , Surratt. They would proceed asfar as practicable this afternoon bat would not consider the testimony closed in respect to- any one until allthe testimony fpr the defense was in. Testimony of Father Woggat. By Mr. Aiken.— ft. State your residence in this city and your occupation. A. My residePce is Gonzaga College, in this city, in P street, between Ninth and Tenth; lam i\ clergyman. ft. Are you acquainted with the prisoner, Mary EL .surratt? A. I am and have been Tor ten or eleven years. ™ ft. Has that acquaintance been of an intimate cha racter? A. I knew her very well. ft Are you acquainted with her general reputation? A. I have always heard everyone speak verv hieniv oi her as a lady and a Christian. fi J Q. In all that acquaintance has anything ever come to your knowledge that would indicate'an unchristian character on her part?- A. No, never ft. Areyou acquainted with Lewis J. Weichman? A. Only very slightly; I saw him a few times; lam not well acquainted with bim. Q. State whether, from your knowledge, he has ever been a student of divinity. - Question objected to by Mr. Bingham, on the ground that the purpose of the question was to impeach the Character of We chman. He could not be contradicted in respect to entirely immaterial matter. _M.r,Alken replied that the intention was to impeach Weichman's testimony in this and manv other par ticulars, and as tbe foundation had been'laid in the cross-examination the question was a proper one. - The objection Was sustained by the Court T&olllfc^tit'ite^ °ity * ElcllmP^' * Cathotic Question, objected to by Mr. Bingham, for the same reason as last question, and objection sustained by tha Q. In your acquaintance with Mrs. Surratt have von ,^IT,ss'exiJmin?<1?y J"¦ time. Q. Can you state under what circumstances he left? A. I do not know under what circumstances; 1 believe Mrs. Surratt sent him away. ft. Are you aware of his getting drunk in the house and making disturbance? A. I am not; I heard he had bottles up there, but I didn't know anything about his getting drunk. Q. What room did you occupy in the house? A. I slept in the same room with Mrs, Surratt and ber daughter, Anna. ft. Was there a photograph of Booth in that room? A. Yessir. Q. Was it yours? A. No. ft. Have you ever seen that picture, "Night and Morning?" A. Yes. Q. Was that yours? A. No; that belonged to .Mrs. Surratt's daughter. ft. Do you know anything about Booth's picture being placed behind that? A. No. Q. Did you own many of the photographs inthe bouse? A. Not many; I owned some in the albums. ft. Were there photographs of Union Generals in tbe bouse? A. I saw one or McC'lellan, I think. ft. Did you, while you were in the house, know any thing of defective eyesight on the part of Mrs. Surratt? A. I know she could not read or sew at night, on ac- ' count of her eyesight. Q. Are you acquainted with Louis J. Weichmann? A. Yes. Q. Was he treated in the house like a friend? A. He was treated more like a son. ft. When did you last see, Booth there? A. The » Monday before the assassination. -., ft. When did you last see John Surratt? A. The nitfht that be left the bouse, two weeks before the assassination. ft. Did you see him anywhere in the city during-those two weeks? A. No. ft. Did you ever buy any photographs of Booth ot give one to Miss Anna Surratt? A. I bought one, and she bought one herself. ft. Have' you ever known Mrs. Surrat^ to be unable to recognize persons of her acquaintance ip tbe street? A. I remember of her passing Mrs. Kirby in the street once, without recognizing her; she did not see her at all. Q. Was Mrs. Kirby on the same side ot the street with her? A. Yes sir. Cross-examined by Judge Holt— Q. Did you ever 90 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. know Mrs, Surratt to have any tUflJcolty ip recogmz- ing'her friends in theparlpr by gaslight; did she always recognize you? A, She did, . ,. (X "yfcu. speak of owning some of these photographs' did you own the photographs of Stephens, Davis and Beauregard? A. No sir, they did not belong to me. Testimony of George H. Calvert. George H.Calvert was next called as a witness for the defense; and questioned in reference to a letter written by him to Mrs. Surratt on tbe 12th of April last, but tbe letter itself not being in court, his examina tion was' postponed until the letter could be produced. Testimony of B. F. Gwynn. By Mir. Allien'.— ft; Where do you reside? A. In Prince Georges county, Maryland, near' Surrattsville. ft. Are ypu acquainted with the priseher, Mrs. Sur ratt?! a. Yes; I have been acquainted with her seven dr eight years. „ .-,,., Q. Were you present at her house In Surrattsville ih April-last? A. Iwas.trrtfdsytne murder of theJPresi- dent; I came from Marlboro', and met her there; while I was passing in tbe carriage Mrs. Surratt said she wanted to sec me, and I stopped to see her^ w Q. Have you been IP the Habit of transacting business 'fiir her? A. Yes, I have transacted some business for her; I sold some land for her. ft. Did you transact any business for her that day? A. No; she gave a letter to me to give to Mr. Northe. ft. Were ycu .present at the house when Mr. Floyd returned? A. So sir.v ¦*,,<,„ * t - ft. Are you acquainted with John M. Floyd? A. I ft! Did you meet him tbat day? A. I did, at Marl boro*. Q. What time in theafternoofl of tbe 14th did you see him? -A. At about four or four and a half; I parted with him at the road; I did not see bim afterwards* Q. Wbat was his condition at the time? A. He had been drinking right smartly. . . Q. Did he seem to do considerably intoxicated? A. I could hardly tell that; he acted like a man who had been drinking some. „_, w . -. ft. Had you a personal knowledge of Mr. Northe's tfuying land of Mrs. Surratt? A. Ihad of his buying land of her husband. ' , ft. Did you know personally that she was there that day on tbatbusir.ess? A. Not except by the letter. Q. Was Mr. l*\oyd present at the time Mrs. Surratt ' banded you that letter? A. No sir. ! Q. Did you see him again that afternoon? A. Ldid not. • Cross-examined by Judge Holt.— ft. Did you have airy conversation with Mr.i Floyd that afternoon? A. Yes,lthinkldidsee,him three or tour times that day at Marlboro'. Q. I mean at home? A. I did not see him after be gpthome. A • By tbe Court.— Q. How far is it where you parted with him on the road to Surrattsville? A. About five miles. „ Mr. Aiken.— Q. You received the letter? A. .Yes. and read it; the direction on the outside was, to read it and deliver it to Mr. Northe. Testimony of Captain Geo. Cottingr&atm. By Mr. Aiken.— ft. What is your business1? A. Special officer in Major O'Beirne's Board of Enroll ment. ft. Were you engaged in making any arrests of par ties after the assassination? A. I was. ft. Did you arrest John M. Floyd? A. No sir; my partner, who was with me. arrested him. ' Q. Did you see him after he was arrested? A. I did; he was put into my care at the Post Office at Surratts ville. . Q. What information did Floyd give you at that time? A. He denied knowing anything about it and iov two days continued to deny it. I finally told him that I was satisfied he knew about it; that he had it onhismindaod the sooner he got rid of it the better. Hesaid, '"Oh! my God, if I should makea confession they would murder me--", Said I, '"who would murder you?" He said these parties in the conspi racy. I told him that if he was going to free himself by letting these parties get out of it, that was his business, not mine; I then put him" in the?guard- house; beseemed to be much excited; the Lieutenant went to Washington for reinforcements; Mr. Floyd then stated to me that Mrs. Surratt had come down to his place on Friday, between four and five'o'clock; that nhe told him to have tbe firearms ready; that two men would call for them at twelve o'clock; that two men did call; that narold dismounted from his horse and went Into Mrs. Surratt's or rather Floyd's tavern, and said "I have something to tell you;" that Harold then told him to get those firearms; tbat the firearms were brought down and Harold took one; that Booth's carbine was carried to bim, whetber by Harold or Floyd I do not remember; but tbat Booth said be could not carry a carbine, it was as much as he could do to carry himself; that his leg was broken; that. Booth said "We have murdered the President," and that Harold said "We have picked off Seward;" lasked Floyd why he-did not state these facts in the first ninr-ft and not allow these1 parties to escape: that he ^ea^tddbavespoken about the firearms being iUOhwS mformation didbe give you aboutfirearms A I was in thehouse when he came m from Bryari- ^Wri^aSd commenced crying out and hamm^enng "oh Mrs Surratt, that vie woman, she has ruined &&, rlkid to h iro , " You stated there were two cav- bines,anftbat°BoSh could hot carry ^:wher^ that carbine?" he told me it was up stairs .tbflftMJa Surratt had some bags over it; I ™tt^»h™ OTjgS T finrlif* T tnifl-tliem T would cut up the house Deiore T would^gVaway without I? with fat he told the£tee£ man to get an axe: I did notgointo tne™°S«Kh1Jw?T went until I heard? three -knocks on tb® Y™' t^u?J then went in, and after about the seventh blow I saw the carbme: it had been suspended by a si ring abo va, , the plastering; the string seemed to have broken and ithadfallen,down. ¦ _. ^^ ^ ft. You did not find the carbine where he told you it was? A. No; I huntedforitbutcpuldu.otiino.it. -ft. During these two days, when Mr. Floyd was de- nyingallknowledgeofthese parties, did he mention the name of Mrs. Surratt? , A. Not while be was de nying it;. after heconfessedhementioncdher named.^. ft. Who was present besides yourself at the time Mr, Floyd made this statement to you? A. Nobody that I know exceptthat Mr. Jenkins, a brother of Mrs. Sur ratt, was up in tbe room, when I said Iknew that Ml, Floyd was guilty and that, my mind was made up; I know that be was in the conspiracy; there had beep: blockade-runners arrested at hislaouse: his house was a head-quarter3 for Rebels and blockade-runners dur ing Floyd's occupation, of it. t ft. Did be ever make any further statement? A. Yea sir. - ft. What was that statement? QiuestiQn objected to by Mr. Bingham, and objection' sustained by tbe Court. r T. , _. ft. DVyy.ou recollect positively tbat Mr. Lloyd used the words "fire-arms?" A . I do. jJ ft. Didhe tell you Mrs. Surratt boaght them there? A. No; K think hesaid Johnny Surratt brought them Q. When did Mr. Floyd state that Mrs. SnTratt made that remark aboulrthe fire-arms? A. It was on Fri day, between four and five o'clock. * ft. Did he have the appearance at that time of being very much -frightened? A. Oh no. he was not atraidj. everything he said was voluntary; I advised him. whea I sent him downtoColonel Welles to make a clean breast of it. ft, Whatdaypf tbeweek did he make this confes sion to you? A. I think it was on Tuesday or Wednesn day; I will not be positive: my business was to pre pare the way for other officers over me.. ft. Did hesay anythingat that timeaboutMrs. Sur^ ratt getting him into difficulty? A. Yes bedid; he cried and threw his baPds over bis wife's neck ana howled for bis prayer book; Mr. Floyd's wife and Mrs. Offut were there and heard all the conversation in that room; I told them to trace up. Cross-examined by Judge Holt.— State whether at the tim e Mr. Floyd mentioned the reasons why he had; concealed bis knowledge of this matter?' A. He said he was afraid of parties there; he wasafraidif he made this confession they would murder him. ft. Who did you understand him to refer to? A. To those engaged in this conspiracy. Q. What was the precise language he used in refer-; ence to Mrs. Surratt? A. It was "Mrs. Surratt, that vile woman, she hasruined me; I am tobe shot ! I am to be shot!" he meant by that, I suppose, that his guilt was so great there was no hope for him. I&e-examination of R. J. Early. (Former witness for the prosecution, but now sum moned for the defense).— ft. You stared in your past examination that you came down to Baltimore on Thursday afternoon in company with 0*La*ughlin, Captain Henderson aPd Mr. Murphy; will you state in' what train you came? A. On the hatf-pastthree o'clock train I believe. ft. At what time did you reach Washington? A. At the Usual time; I believe it takes two hours? ' ft. Did you come on tbe Accommodation train? A. I dbn't know what train it was; I think it reached hew about hall-past five o'clock. Q. Now I wish you would state, sir, whereyou and O'Laughlin went to when you left the cars, and every place you were present with him? A., After leaving the cars wo made our way to the avenue to LIchaus or Pullman's hotel; I think we went inside there and cams out again; Henderson went' *n to a barber's shop to get shaved; O'Laughlin then asked me to go witb him to theNatlohal Hotel; when wo got there pi went to the desk, telling me to wait, and ho would do- tain me onlya few minutes; I went as Jbr as the door; be left met standing there, and came back again in three to five iriinutes. andafterthat we went back to Lichau's, and thence up the avenue. ft., Did you take any sppper there? A. Nosir; wa went rvs far as Eleventh, street, and turned back and went ft) Wecker's dinner salbon.over Wall and Steven son's. I think. Q. Did you take supper there? A. Yes sir. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 91 ¦ ft. How long did that last? A. I guess about three- quarters of an hour. ft. What time, did you leave there? A. About eight o'clock or half-past seven'. I should say; after coming Out of there we returned to Rullman's Hotel, ind proceeded as far as the corner of Third street, where O'Laughliu and Murphy be left me and Henderson, saying they weregoimrto see Mr. Hoffman, a sick man, and would see us on the dorner again; they returned, accompanied by Daniel Lockran, and after that the flve'efus started up the Avenue to see the illumination; Mr. Lockran wanted us to go as far as the Treasury, as far as the public re servation, above Seventh street, when one complained oT sore feet, and would go no further; we returned down the other side of the reservation, when Murphy and Henderson said they had to leave; thatwas get ting on to nine o'clock, and we went into the Canter bury Music Hall just as tbey were finishing the first piece; we remained there till about ten o'clock, and Chen went to the Metropolitan Hotel, and from- there Went to En U man's Hotel; we reached there about a quarter or hall-past ten o'clock. TJ. Was O'Laughlin with you all that time? A. He was sir. TJ. How late did you remain there? A. About one hour sir. ft. Did anybody join you there? A. Mr. Gillett was passing there with a lady at the time, and stopped and Suoke to O'Laughlin, I believe; we left there then and the others joined us, and we went down the avenue as mras Second street. I believe; Mr. O'Laughlin was acquainted at a saloon on the cornerot E and Se- Snd streets, where there was a dance or some- ing goiug on, and took us over there; one of the party bought tickets, and we went into the ball; we stayed there about an hour, and came outandwent uptbe avenue again, and went into the Metropolitan, and remained there till arter one o'clock; we then went opt for five minutes, came back and went to bed. , ft. Was O'Laughlin with you all that night. A. Yes sir. ft. Do you know where Secretary Stanton's house is? A. Nosir. Q. Do you know where Willard's Hotel is? A. Yes Blr. ft. Now Stanton's house is more than six squares north of Willard's; I will ask you whetber O'Laueblin could have been there between nine and eleven o'clock? A. Nosir. (Objected to). Q. Now sir, you stated that on Friday you woke him at the hotel, and that he was with you most of Friday? A. Yes sir. Q. Will you explain again where be was till bed time on Friday night? A. Iwas only with him from nightfall; he was at the hotel from supper till the time he Went out with Mr. Fuller. ft. Where did you have supper? A, AtWelker's, sir; at the same place. ft. When did you*go there? A. At about 8 o'clock. ft. How long did you stay there? A. Isuppose three quarters of an hour. ft. You said ynu was there when the procession passed of Navy Yard men? A. Yes sir. ft. Where did you go from there? A. We returned tpJEtnll man's, ft;'Howlongdidbe stay there? A. I can't say ex actly; Irecoilectdistinctly hisgoing with Fuller, but I dpn't recollect for certain whether It was before or after the procession passed. ft. Do you know how he was dressed on Friday eve ning? A. Yessir; he had a co'at similar— it was just like a frock coat behind. Q. Look at that coat (pointing to tbe prisoner); Is that thesame? A. Yessir. - Q. Is that thesame pants? A. Yessir. ft.* Did you make them? A. Yes sir. ft. Whatsortofa vest had be? A. It was of tbe same material as the pantaloons. ftWhatcolor? A.Weil, asort ofplaid, onlyitis striped up and down, a kind of purple and green. - , Cross-examination by JudgeHolt.— Q. State whether or not you were under the ^influence of liquor that night. A. Well, yes, towards ten o'clock. CJ. How often did you drink before ten o'clock? A. I could not say how many times I drank; we drank prettv considerable. Q. Eight times: ten times? A. I think we might have drank as often as that, but it was mostly ale; I never saw O'Laughlin drink any liquor. ft. You were not separated from him at all on Fri day evening? A. Not till the time he went out of the house. ft, Wbat time was that? A. Ten o'clock, or a little after. ft. When did you see him again? A. On Saturday morning. Q. Where did he leave you? A. At 10 o'clock on Friday night, at Rullman's, Hotel. Q. Where is thai? A. Between Third and Four-and- a-half street, the second door from the Globe office. ft. Did he go out then? A. "Yes sir; with Mr. Fuller. By the Court— Q. How long were, you at the dining table on Thursday? A. FrPm three-quarters ot an hour to an hour; we had to staythere Pntil the dinners were got ready for tbe four of us. ' ' Q. Was there considerable wine drank there tbat afternoon? A. Nosir, we had no wipe. By Mr. Cox.— ft. Do you recollect what time It was when you ieitthe Canterbury, on Thursday night? A. It was alter the'danceby some vonn? ladies. ft. Did I understand you to say O'Loughlin never drinks whisky? A. I seldom if ever saw him drink any. ft. Did you ever see him drink? A. Only twice, I believe. ft. Have you known him long? A. For the last five: years, and for the last.ten months more especially. Testimony of Mr. .ffiurnhy. CJ. Where did you reside? A. In Baltimore, sir. ft. D-d you come to Washington on Thursday, April 13th. A. Yessir. ft. In what company? A. With O'Laughlin, Hen derson an d Earl y . ft. Who proposed tbe -trip? A. Henderson. ft. What time did you get to Washington? A. About1 five o'clock. Q. Will you state all that took place all that evening? A. Wecame from the depot down to Rullman's, and there took adrink.or two; we started from there and went to the Metropolitan, arrti went to several places; we took supper at Walker's about eight o'clock; it might have been about half-past seven; ft. How long were you occupied there? A. It might- have been about half an hour. ft. Did supper have to be prepared? A. Yessir. ft. Alter you left there where did you go? A. We I went to Rullman's again, and there we met Dan Lockran: we then went to see the illuminations, and stopped on the corner of Ninth stre2t and the avenue, andaiterstonping theresome time we star'ed, and went to the Canterbury, leaving them at ten o'clock to go to Rullman's; it wasabout a quarter past ten when, we got there; we then went to Plata's, and staid there about an hour and a half, and that brought us to half- past eleven or twelve o'clock; we then started for Rid dles, on the corner of Dand Second street, and staid there till hall-past twelve or one o'clock, and then came back to the corner of Sixth street and the Ave nue; and went frpm there to the- corner ot Tenth and th e A venue, where we staid a while. ft. What was going on there? A. It was an all-night bouse, and we went in to get some refreshments. " ft. Whattfme did youget back to the Metropolitan ? A. About two or half-past two ; we went across the way to get n, drink, and I think that brought us to half- past two o'clock, and'then we went to bed. Q. Did I understand you to say that O'Laughlin was with you all that time? A, Yes' sir, all that day; oh! he went with Early and left Ps about five minutes and went to the National Hotel: that was while Hender son was gettingshaved; I didn't go but waited until they came back. ft. Do you know where Secretary Stanton's house is? A. Yessir. ft. State whether O'Laughlin was there that night. A. No nearer than the corner of Ninth and Pennsyl vania avenue. ft. Did you see him on Friday? A. I was all day with htai up to eight o'clock at night, when the three of thefn left me to go to supper. ft. You did not go to supper then? A. No sir. ft. Did you see him on. Saturday? A. Yes sir, I was with him from nine o'clock until we went to the de pot, got our tickets, and went to Baltimore? Q. Were you at Rullman's Hotel when the news of the President's assassination reached there? A. No sir. Q. During this trip what was his mannc:- did he appear excited? A. No sir; I never saw him in better spirits in all my life than hewas then. ft. I will ask you whetber it was the plan of your partv to go back to Baltimore on Friday aiternoon? A. Yes sir, itwas our intention to go, but we stayed at the intercession of Mr. Henderson, who wanted to see a lady. So the whole party went up on Saturday? A. I did not go till Sunday morning. Testimony of Mr. O. I^ocferan. Q. Do you reside in this city? A. Yes sir. ft. Do you know the accused? A. Yes sir. Q. How long have you known him? A. About 18 or 20 months. Q. Did you see him on Thursday, the 13th of April? A. Yessir. ft. At what Hour? A. At about a quarter after seven; Q. Where? A. On the steps of Rullman's Hotel, Pennsylvania avenue. ft. Who was with him? A. Henderson, Edward Murphy, Barney Early and O'Laughlin were the whole party. ,..,,. ft. Bid you join that party? A. Nosir; I went home to supper: I joined them about s o'clock; O'Li'.ughlin and Murphy came to my boarding-house and we went by Adams' Express office; they had left Heuderson and Early on Pennsylvania avenue. ,Q. After that where dirt yon gfi? A. To Rullman's Hotel , and from there to corner Pennsylvania avenue aud Ntath street; when we got there I should judga it wasabout!) o'clock.- 92 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. , ft. Did you look at your watch? ,A, Yes sir ; some one said it was too late to go to the Treasury, and, I, looked at my watch and found it was nine o'clock, and went to the corner of Seventh and Louisiana avenue, and from there to the Canterbury. ..ft. At what time did you go in there? A. At abept half-past njne, I supppse. ' ft. How long did you stay? A. Till ten or a quarter after. ' ft. Where did you go from there ? A. To the Metro politan. ft. And from there? A. To, Rullman's Hotel. . Q. "What time did you reach there? A. Probably at half-past ten o'clock.. . Q. I will ask you whether the accused was with you from the time you joined them till the time you went to Rullman's Hotel?' A. Yes sir. ft, Do you know where Secretary Stanton's house is? A. No sir. ft. Do you know where Franklin Square is? A. Yes sir. Q. Could the accused have been there during that time? A. Nosir. . , ft. Did anybody join you at Rullman's Hotel? A. yes sir; Mr, Rolette. ft. How late were you with them? A. Till after twelve o'clock. ft. Was O'Laughlin with you all that time? A. Yes sir. " Q. Did you, sleep in the same bouse witb them? A. No sir. . ft. Did you see them next day? A. No sir. Q. Were you with them the next evening? A. Yes sir; between seven and eight o'clock, at the Metropo litan Hotel. ft. Were you with them any time during the even ing? A. Yes: till half-past ninepr a quarter past. ft, Did they go to Walker's when you were there ? A. Not that I am aware of; I heard them speak of going to supper ; I don't know whether they did or not. - ft. Did you see them any more after that? A. Nosir; not that night. • \ Q. Did you notice the dress of O'Laughlin? A. He -had on plaid pants and vest and a black coat. ft. Look at the dress he has now. A. That looks like the pants, but he had a vest on. A. What sort of a hat did he have? A. I think he bad a black slouched hat on. ¦ By the CourJ.— Q. What part of tbe Canterbury pi ay- house did you enter? A. We went into, the fifty-cent place, first, then Captain Henderson went to get his change corrected and they said they would give bim tickets for the orchestra chairs, which was seventy-five cents apiece; so we moved from the place where we were first and went into the other seats just behind the orchestra. i-Q. Did you all sit togethei? A. Two of us sat to gether, and the rest right behind us. ¦ ft. You saw tbe whole party all the time you were in thehouse? A. Yessir. , Q. None left till all left? A. We all.left together. . By Mr. Cox.— Q. What was CLaughlip's manner, did he seem excited? A. He appeared very lively and made the remark that they had come from Balti more to see the illumination and' bave a good type. Q. Was he intoxicated? A. I don't think he vias; he was lively and merry-like. Testimony of Mr. Rolette. ft. What is your business? A. I am solicitor for a New York cracker bakery. • Q. Do you know the accused? A. Yes sir. ft. How long have you known him? A. In the neigh borhood of two years. ¦ ft. Did you see him on the evening of the isth of April? A. Yes sir, between ten and half-past ten o'clock I had been to the Capitol with a lady, and when Ipassed back I saw him on the steps of Bull- man's Hotel. Q. State whether you joined that party afterwards. A. Yessir. ¦¦ Q. How long were you with, them that evening? A. Till about \i o'clock. ft. Did you see him the next day? A. Yes sir; on Friday morning, and I was with tbe whole party on * Friday nightuntil between eleven and twelve o'ciock- Q. Where were you when you received tbe news of the President's assassination? A. At Bullman's Hotel. Q. Was O'Laughlin there? A. Yes sir. ft. Do you know anything of his going away from the hotel that night? A. He and Fuller went oucsome- time after the news was received ot the President be ing killed. Q. Did you notice his behavior when he heard the news of the President's assassination? A. I did not, air. ¦ Q. Do you know how he was dressed? A. He had on a pair of Scotch plaid pants and vest. .•» Testimony off Mr. JPnrdy. ft. Do you reside In the city? A. I do. Q. What is your business? A. I am Superintendent of Rullman's Hotel. ft. Ho you know the accused? A. Yea sir. Q. Did you see bim on Thursday tho 13th of April? A. I saw , him with Mr. Rolette, Mr. Murphy and Mr. , Early. " ' , ,.t, - ft. -Where were they? A. At my restaurant . ; ft. At what hour? A. Abput half-past ten o'clock. ft. How Idhg did they stay? A. Till about twelye, Q. Werethey there all that time? A. Idon'tknow; I was all round in the kitchen and other places;; I closed about twelve o'clock. , , ft, Were they there when you closed? A. Yessir, Q. Was O'Laughlin with them? A. Yes.sir. ft. You know him well? A. I have' known him about three months. Q.. Did you see them on Friday nigt? A. Yes sir. ft. At'thesameplace? A. Yessir. ft. Were you there when the news of the assassina tion reached you? A. Yessir. ft. Didyou communicate it tothem? A. Itold them that, a Cavalry Sergeant t6ld me the President was assassinated, and that Bopth was the one who did It;, he seemed surprised, and said he bad bten in Booth's company, and people might think he had something to do with it. ft. What time did he leave there that night? A, Near one o'clock. Q. Did tbe entire party go then? A. Yes sir. , By the Court.— Q. You say you have known' htm about three months; has be beeh much about tfie city? A. Hewuujd be down two or three times a week; sometimes I would'nt see him for two or three week's; ft. Did he always stay at your house? A. Yessir. ' By Mr. Cox —ft. Look at his dress, and say whether it is thesame he wore that night. A. I think it is; I didn't pay much attention to his dress. Testimony of Mr. Fnller. ft. Doyou reside in the city? A. Yes sir. « Q. Do you know the accused? A. Yes sir. ft- How long have you known bim? A. Between twelve and fourteen years. Q. Did you see him on either Thursday or Friday, the 13th and 14th of April? A. I saw him on Friday, thei4th. ft. Where? A. At Rullman's. ft. What time of day? A. Between seven and eight o'clock in the evening. Q. Did you see him any later? A. Yessir: between ten and eleven. ft. How near ten? A. I can't say exactly; it was be? tween ten and eleven. Q. Did you receive the news of the President's assas sination that night? A, Yessir. Q. Doyou know where he was between eight and ten o'clock? A. I do not, sir. ft. What was has conduct when he beard the news-of the President's assassination? A. He looked sorry. ft. Did he show any fright? A. No sir. ft. Did he say anything about Booth? A. No- sir. Cross-examination by Judge Holt.— Q. Did he go home with you? A. Yes sir; he used to often go hpme with me. Q. Did you invite him to go down with you? A. I did sir. By Mr. Cox.— Q. Did be ever reside in Washington ? A. Yessir. ft. Is bis brotber in business here ? A. Yes sir. Re-examination. of Captain Coldiugham. ft. State again the precise language thatM>*. Floyd used in his confession with reference to Mrs. Surratt The question was objected to and withdrawn. ft. 1 will ask the witness if he did not make a diffe rent statement to me with reference to Mr. Floyd's con fession ? This question was also objected to, but after some discussion the objection was withdrawn by the Judge> Advocate-General, and the witness Answered as &t lows:— * A. I should like to relate the whole conversation between Mr. Aiken at the Metropolitan Hotel; Itbintt it was Sunday evening: he asked me to take a drinfa, ^nd I took a di'ink with bim; he said I am going tD bave you as a witness in this case: he tcld me tp sit on the sofa, but I said I would go outside; the first ques tion he put to me was was I a Catholic; I told bim noi then he said Mr. Floyd had made a confession to me about Mrs. Surratt and said, will ydu> state to me what that ' confession was; I said I decline that, but I will answer any question you put to me; he wanted to pick it out of me, and I didn't think I was bound to tell him. ft. Did I ask you if Mr. Floyd said anything in refe rence to firearms? A. You nsked me if Floyd had made a confession to me, and I said yes. and you said what was it? and I declined answering, but I said I would answer any question you would ask. - Q. What did yon tell me this afternoon? A. I told you a lie; you were trying to pick out of me, and I told you that you might call me Into Court, and I would state what x had told you, a lie, and now state that I did do it Testimony of Mr. Morton. ft. fiid you see O'Laughlin In Baltimore on Sunday night? , A. Yes sir. ft. Do you know whether he had been Informed tbat TRIAL OF THE, ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ¦93 an officer had been insearchofhim? A. That is wbat he told me. .', Q. Didhe'sayhe was going to give himself up? A. Yes sir; he said he wpuld on Monday morning. Testimony of George R. Woods. ft. Wheredo you Beside? A. In Boston, sir. ft Have you been in the hah t of seeing the photo graphs of leaders of the Rebellion exposed for sale there? A. Yes sir. i ft. Freely exposed? A* Yes sir; photographs of all celebrities. ' . t . Q. Have you seen them In the possession of persons Supposed to be loyal? A. Yes sir, ¦ The Court then adjourned until 10 o'clock to-mor row morning. -¦- Washington. May 26.— The Court room was to-day again crowded with spectators ofbothsexes, the largest portion of them beingunable to find seats. The main attraction is the appearance ofthe prisoners. ; After the reading of the testimony taken yesterday, Mr. Aiken, the counsel for Mrs. Surratt, made an ap plication for the reca'l of Mr. Van Steinaker as a wit ness for cross-examination, stating that since his ex amination material facts had come to the knowledge of Mrs. Surratt, which would enable the counsel to contradict the witness. He did not desire to call Stein aker as a witness for tbeciefense. Judge Advocate-General Holt said that the witness had been examined and discharged without objection . by counsel. If the latter desired him for the defence tbeGoveinment would make an effort to find him, but be declined to recall him as a witness for the prosecu tion. Re-examination of R. F. Gwynn. By Mr. Aiken — Q. Did you carry a- letter for Mrs. Surratt for Mr, Nqthey on the 14th of April last, and if so is this the letter you carried? A. It is; I read the letter atthe time, by her direction. The counsel then placed in evidence tbe following letter— Surbattsvill-e, Md.? April 14, 1865.— Mr. John Nothey.— Sir:— I have this day received a letter from Mr Calvert, intimating that either you or your friend bave represented to bim tbat I am not-willing to settle with yon for the land. You know that I am ready, and have been waiting for you for thelast two years; and now, if you do noteome within the next, tep days, I will settle with Mr. Calvert and bring suit against you immediately. Mr. Calvert will give you adeed on seeeiving payment, . , (Signed) M. E. Surratt, Administratrix of J. M. Surratt Testimony of Father JLanahan. By Mr. Aiken.— Q. State your residence and occupa tion. A. My residence is at Charles county, near Beantown: I ama Catholic priest. * ft. Areyou acquaiated with the prisoner Mrs. Sur ratt? -A. 1 have been acquainted with her about thir teen year's, and intimately for nine years. ft Do you know her general reputation as a Chris tian woman? A. Yes; she is, in my estimation, a very good Christian woman. Mr. Bingham— We do not want your estimation, but her general reputation. Witness— Her character.stapds in the peigpborhood where she lived as a good Christian woman. Q. Has she been attentive to her religious duties? A. I could not say exactly, because she does not belong to my congregation. ' ft. Have you ever beard her express anv disloyal sentiment? A. Never. . Q. Do you know personally anything as to defective eyesight on ber part? A. I 'do not. Q. Has she never, in your ' presence, been unable to recognize friends a short distance from ber? A. Ido not remember: I could notswear to that. Cross-examined by Judge Holt.— ft. Have you had conversation with her since tbe Rebellion in regard to the affairs ofthe country? A. I have. ft. Have you ever heard her express aloyal senti ment? A. I do not remember tbat I have, ft. Is pot her reputation that of a disloyal- woman? A. I think not; she never expressed that sentiment to me; I'may have*heard her general reputation for loy alty or disloyalty spoken of, but I do not remember it. Testimony of Rev. Fatner Yonng?. Q. State your residence and occupation. A. Resi dence at Dominick's Church, . Washington; I am a Catholic priest.- ft. Areyou acquainted with tbe prisoner, Mrs. Sur- xatt? A. I bave known her 1 thmk about eight or ten years: I cannot say that my acquaintance has been of an Intimate character; I had a congregation hi the part of the.couotry where she lived, apdip passing by her bouse about once a month I have occasionally called lor about half an hour. ft. Are you accmainted with her general reputation as a Christian lady? A. lam; so far as 1 have heard it spoken of, ithasbee,n with the greatest praise; I never beard, anything whatever, uni'avovabfe to her character, but on the contrary everything highly fa vorable. ft. In .all your intercourse with her have you ever heard her express ad.'sloyal sentimept? A. I do not recollect of ever hearing her speak on that! question at ft. Have you personal knowledge of any defective eyesight on her pan? A. I cannot say that I have; I never heard of her having weak eyes, Q. You have never been present when she was un able to recognize her friends at alittle distance? A. ¦Not that I remember. Testimony of George H. Calvert. By Mr. Aiken. — Staj'e whetber Qn or about the 13th of" April last you addressed a letter to Mrs, Surratt, and if so, whether this is the letter? A. ldid; this is thp letter, The counsel for the accused then produced the fok lowing letter, which was read. "Riversuale, April 12, 1865— Mrs. M. E. Surratt^- Dear.Madam:— During a late visit to the lower portion ofthe county I ascertained of the willingness of Mr. Nothey to settle with you, and desire to call vour at tention to the fact in urging tbe settlement of the, claim of my late father's estate. However unplea sant, I must insist upon closing up th.s matter, as it is imperative in an early settlement of the estate, which is necessary. You will, therefore, please in form me, at your earliestconvenience, as to 'how and wnen you will be able to pay the balance remaining due on the landpurcbased by your late husband. " Yours, respectiully, "(Signed) GEORGE H. CALVERT, Jr." , Q. Were you, at Surrattsville on the 14th of April 7 A. I was not. Testimony of W. Ii. Moylc. By Mr. Aiken— Q. Are you acquainted with Mrs, Surratt. the prisoner at the bar? A. I have,a siore acj quaintance. Q. Are yon acquainted with her general character? A. I know nothing of her,, except as a store acquaint ance; l have never conversed with ber, except in the store. Q. Have you heard Mrs. 'Surratt express any dis^ loyal sentiment in your presence?, A. I hiave not, either loyal or disloyal; I have bad no political conver sations with her. ft. Areyou acquainted with JohnH. Surratt? A. I knew him by sight. ft. When did you see him last in this city? A. The latter part of February, or first of March, just j.rior tp the draft. ft Describe bis personal appearance. A. He is tall: rather of light complexion, delicate looking, and bei tween twenty and twenty-three years of age; I thipk about six feet in height: I cannot say whether be wore .a goatee or moustache; my impression is he did not. . Cross examined by Judge Bingham— Q. Do you know he was over five ieet nine inches in height? A. Not positively. Testimony of P. H. Bffanlsray. By Mr. Cox.— Q. State your residence Ltnd occupation. A. Residence, Baltimore; occupation, clerk to Eaton Bros. & Co. Q. Are you related to the accused, Michael O'Laugh lin ? A. I am his brocher-in-law. Q. State when Michael O'Laughlin came to Balfci; more lrom the South? A. I think itwas iiiAugustlSG2, ft. State what his occupation has been from that time till the present? A. He came home somewhat sick and remained for about a month; he then went with his brother, who was in Washington in theproduce and feed business: he remained with him until the fall of 1863, when his brother removed from Washington, having left his house there as a branch of hi« Baltimore business, and Michael attended to his business for him IP Washington up to the 14th of March of this year;, J.hat is, there are evidences, that Michael had the collection aud receiving of orders from customers, the goods being supplied from Baltimore. ft. Did this arrangement with bis brother require him to be in Washington? A. I could not Ray posi tively bow frequently he was here. He was here off and on for the^period from the time his brother gave up business here until this last transaction on the 14th lot April. ' ft. Did you know J. Wilkes Booth? A. Yes, inti mately. Mrs. Booth owns tbe property right opposite our house. Michael and William were schoolmate* of John Wilkes Booth. They attended the school of A. M. Smith. not veryfarirom thehouse. Q. How long has his intimacy with them continued? A. To my positive knowledge it has been almost twelve years. q: where was Michael's home in Baltimore? A. He lived with me. No. 57 North Exeter street. Q. Can you state ^bere he was in the month of April to the ljth? A. From the 18th of March until he came 94 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. down to Washington on the 13th of April he was with me. Q. Can you speak with certainty about his being at home tbat time Or part of it? A. He arrived home after the assassination, on Saturday evening; I saw him about seven o ciock ; tbe officers had then been to the house In search of him, and when I informed him Of that t fact, he ibid me Mr. Bingham.— Vou Peed not state what he said to you1 ; declarations of the prisoner cannot be adduced in his defense Mr. Cox staled that evidence had been adduced by tbe prosecution to prove that the prisoner was fleeing from arrest,, and it was legitimate to meet that on tbe partof thedeiense, bysbowihgthat instead of fleeing he voluntarily surrendered himself. Judge Holt remarked, that if the witness was cau tioned npt to repeat the declarations of the prisoner, he might go on" to state the facts in connection with tbe arrest. ft. Did the prisoner protest his innocence? Question oojected tp by Judge Bingham. IftheGo- vernment'had called for any part of the declarations of the prisoner, his counsel would' be entitled to draw them all out, but as that had not been done .the ques tion was inadmissible. Objection sustained by the Court. Q. State whether or not, on Monday morning, the defendant auihor.zed you to procure an officer co take bim into custody? A. He did. 1 Mir. Bingham.— I objected to that; but as the wit ness has answered' the question notwithstanding my objection, -let itgo. Q. How long have you known the accused, O'Laugh lin? A. For about twelve years. Q. State what is his disposition and character? A. As a boy he was always very timid; from my obser vation of twelve years- Mr. -Bingham.— You need not state wbat you be lieve, the Court can draw its own conclusions. Witness.— I have always regarded him as a very amiable boy. I do not remember ever having seen bim in a passion in my life. On political questions he has never been violent. I have never heard him ex press any opinions on the issues ol the day, except in a very .moderate way. ft. I want you to state the facts in regard to tbe al leged arrest. A. Oh Monday morning, in consequence of what Mitchell had said tp Mr.— Mr. Bingham.— I object to that. After discussion, by tbe consent of Judge Holt, the following question was put:— ft. State whether you surrepdered the accused into custody of the officers by the authority of the accused himself. A. I did, by his authority, certainly. The hour of 1 having arrived, the Court took a recess until 2. ' ' After the recess tbe examination of Maulsby was continued. Q. Did you take an officer to the house where the prisoner, O'Laughlin, was? A. With the permission of the Court. I would be glad to state tbe circPmstances surrounding the case. Judge Holt.— You may state them, but you must not repeat what the prisoner said. Witness.— I was proceeding to state that I had seen the accused on Saturday at ternoon, and an arrange- ment.was then made, as I then supposed, for Sunday Sorping; on Saturday evening, at seven o'clock, I met oberts and Early; they had just then returned from Washington; it is difficult to make out a connected narrative without stating the remarks of the prisoner; I saw Mr. Wallace for the first time on Sunday morn ing; he came to the house in search of Michael; other officers were with him at the time; on Monday morn ing 1 was sent for by Michael; I went off in ahack, and called for1 Wallace; I called at Carmich'ael's office; Wallace, did not know Michael's whereabouts at the time, but as the feeling was very high at tbe time? I thought these precautions were necessary; we then went to Mrs. Bailey's house, where he was stopping; I went in by myself, and Michael came out withme apd gave himself up to the officer: there was nothing said from that time until he reached the Marshal's Office. . ft, I think you have stated that Michael came home* on Saturday evening. I ask you If he then informed you where he could be found if wanted. A. He d'd. Mr. Bingham objected to tbe question, and asked that the answer might not be recorded. 'The objection was sustained bytheCourt. ft. You stale that you knew Booth intimately. State Whether he was a man* of pleasing address? Question objected to by Mr. Bingham, Mr. Cox staled that it was the desire of the counsel fbBrfill theaceused that seme evidence should bein- troauced as to the character of J.Wilkes Booth, for the reason that if anyof the accused shoPld be found guilty, while the character of Booth would nPt affect tbeir guilt or Innocence, yet if It was- found that Boo' b Was a man of pleasing addrcssi'calculated to influence apd control the minds of young men with whom he associated, tbat would be a mitigating circumstance. Judge Holt said it would not,mitigate tbe assassina tion by proving that Booth was. a roan of pleasing ad dress. The objection was sustalriett by the Court. Bv tbe Court. — Q .You have stated what has been the "occupation of O'Laughlin since August, 18(ii;; what was his occupation previous to that? A. He was in the Rebel service from 1861 to 1862. Testimony for the prosecution resumed. Testimony ot I^ertis W. Chamberlain.1 By Judge Holt.— ft. State where you reside? A. In Richmond. Va. . „_ , , • . ft. State whether you have been on duiy there In the War, Department of the Confederate "States? A, Y"es sir ' ' * . ¦ "~ ' Q. In what capacity ? A. As clerk in the War Office chiefly. > * *¦ , , ft. State whether or not, while acting, as clerk, yon became acquainted with tbe handwriting of John A, Campbell, Assistant Secretary of War. and late Judgs ot the Supreme Court of the United States, and also with that of Harrison. Private Secretary of Jefferson Davis? A. Yessir. ft. Look at these indorsements on the letter (pub lished some days agolnt Lieutenant Alston, proposing to proceed to tbe North and "strike at the hearts' blood pi the deadliest enenaiesof the South/' andsee whether they are respectively in the handwriting of J. A, Campbell, Assistant Secretary of War, and of Burton TJ. Harrison. A. Yes sir. Q. Was this Harrison private secretary to Jefferson Davis? A. He was so reported and recognized at the War Department. ft. Lpok at that paper, and see if the marks on it are the ordinary official marks. A. It has the mark onii Pf the Secretary of War;' also of General Copper. Ad jutant-General and Inspector-General. It seems to have been referred from the office iOf the Secretary of War to the Adjutant-General's office! where it was directed to be filed. Q, Do I understand you to say that the John A. Campbell of whom you speak was* formerly on-the bench ofthe Supreme Court of the United States?,i.A. He was so reported to have been. Testimony of Henry Finegan. Examined by Judge Holt.— Q. State where you' re side. A. In Boston, Mass. ft. State whether or not you have been in the mili tary serVice of the country during this Rebellion? A. I have, as a commissioned officer. ft. State if in the month o^ February List you were in Montreal, Canada? A. I was and- remained there eleven days. Q. Did you while there make the acquaintance or George N. Sanders, Wrh. Cleary and others of that city? A. I did not make their acquaintance persdn- ally: I knew them very well by sight; 1 saw them at the St. Lawrence Hall, and various other public places IP Montreal. Q. Did you see Jacob Thompson or Beverly Tuckei there? A. Not to my knovvledge. ft. State, whether on one occasion, in the month of February, you, heard a conversation between George N. Sanders and Wm. Cleary, and if so, state what was said and where it occurred. A. I did; the conversation 1 heard took place at St. Lawrence in theevenii'g; I am not certain whether it was on the 14fh or 15th of February; T was sitting in a chair as George N. San ders and William Cleary walked in at the door: they stopped about ten feet from me; I beard Cleary say, **I suppose they are getting ready for the inauguration ot Lincoln next month:" Sanders said, ¦* tes, but if'the boys only have luck, Lincoln will not trouble them much longer;" Cleary said. "Is everything well?" San- ders replied, "'Oh ! yes: 'Booth is bossing the job." Q. You saw these men frequently? A. Yes, I knew Sanders by description the first time I saw him, and inquired concerning him of the clerks. Cross-examined by. Mr. Aiken.— ft. When did you leave the service of the Government? A. In Septem ber, 1863. ft. Where did you reside before you enlisted in tho service?, A. In Boston, Mass. Q. Weere were you born? A. In Ireland. ft. Didyou not reside at tbe South before vou weni to Montreal? A. Nosir. Q. You say ypu were .never introduced to any of those parties? A, Not to Sanders or Cleary; Lwas In troduced to men who claimed to have escaped from prisons in the North. ft. What time in the evening did this conversation at St. Lawrence Hall cccur? A. I thing about 5 o'clock. ft- You say you were about ten jeet from. them. Were tbey conversing in a loud orlo^tono? A. In a ldw tone, I thbught. ft. Were they standing close together? a Yes sir ft. Did you ever see Clay there? A. No- not to my knowledge. ft. D'd you ever see Cleary? A. I did Q. Did you see Sanders? A. I did. ^'J^VV1 you ^collect these two and not the others? A. Because I saw them talking ' CJ. What kind ot a looking man was Cleary? A. He TRIAL. OF THE 1 ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 95 is a man of medium size, of sandy complexion, sandy hair, and carries his neck a little on ohe side. Q. Describe Sanders, a. Sanders is a rather low, short and thick-set, curly hair, moustache and goatee, Sprinkled with grey, and a very burly fbrm: ft. Did you •'hear anything more about the job men tioned in that conversation? A. No sir: ft. And didyou not learn what the job was? A.I did not* Q. When did you leave Montreal? A. On the 17th of February. ft. When didyou first give this information to any out? A.I spoke of it to two or three parties some time ago. Q. Did you communicate it to the Government? A. Not tben. Q. Did you consider it of any importance at that time? A. No sir; I considered it at the time as a piece of braggadocla. ft. when did you first communicate it to the Govern ment? A. A few days ago. ft. Did you ever see John H. Surratt in Canada ? A. I do not know him. Testimony of Charles Dawson. By Judge Holt.— Q. Are you acquainted with the handwriting of J. Wilkes Booth'? A. With his signa ture I am. Q. Look at this card, (Booth's card sent up to Presi dent Johnson, at the Kirk wood House,) and see if it is bis signature ? A. It undoubtedly is. Testimony of Charles Sweeney; By Judge Holt.— ft. State where you reside. A. In New York city. ft. Have you been in the army during the present war? A. I have. ¦y'Q. Have you been a prisoner? A. Yes; the first time I was in Libby two months; the second time I was put on Belle Isle, in Richmond, and then they took me to Andersonville, Georgia. ft. How long did you stay there? A. They kept me about six months before they moved me to Savannah. ft. State how you were treated in those prisons. A. At Belle Isle a man. was allowed to have half a pound of bread a day, and soup, with a little rice and bread scattered in it, and occasionally a little piece-of meat; Tfhen we went to the hospital we had alittle better thread and meat, but there was not much of it; when I first went to Andersonville we got a pretty good quan-, tity of rations; we had all we wanted of corn meal, but the bacon was very strong; they then commenced to cut down our rations, and they got tobe very short, but still we made out to live tbe best we could; then we went down to Savannah; but I ain't done with An dersonville yet; they used to tell the guard that Whenever a man got over his dead line to shoot him, and for every man shpt tbey would give a furlough pf forty days, and whenever a man got even his hand over the dead line tbey would shoot him down as if he were a dog; at one time we were digging a tunnel, and one thing or another in the camn, trying to make our escape, and a cripple, a man with one leg, toldonus; heran outside the dead line once and the guard pro tected him, but Captain Burch told theguardtbat if be did not shoot that man he would shoot him, so the guard had to shoot him; I had a brother at An dersonville, who was very sick and dying for eight days; there was nothing he could eat; the corn meal and beef was not fit for a dog to eat; I tried to get , some money to buy something to feed im, but the guard said, "Let him starve to death;" then I went to the Doctor, and asked him to go and see my brother in tbe tent,who was dying.but hesaid "no, let himd'e;" before he died hesaid tome, "my dear brother, never take an oath of allegiance to their Government, but stick to your own Govern ment;" I said I would, and have done it: I tried two or three times to make my escape, but was recaptured; the first time they bucked and gagged me for six boms; it' was so cold that I could hardly talk when I got, up; the , next T time I thought I would escape and make my way to General Stoneman, who was on a raid, but they caught meand took me back to Captain Winder, who had me put in the stocks; tbe sun was so hot that the next flay I got sick, and could eat nothing for six days, and pretty nearly died; but please God I have a little life in me yet. Do you want to bear anything about Gene ral Cobb? (Laughter.) He niadeaspeech down there, and told the people of Georgia that the graveyard there was big enough to hold all those in the stockade, and that thev intended to starve them all to death. Somebody in the crowtf. said if he could catch "Old Abe" be would hang him, and Cobb said if he could catch bim be would do the same thing. Testimony of James Yonng. By Judge Holt.— ft- Haveyoubeen in the military 'serviceoF the United States during this Rebellion? A. I bave. " ft. Haveyou been a prisoner of war during that time. K so, how long and in what prison, were you confined? A. I was for nine months at Andersonville, and at Other times at Florence and Charleston, S. C. Q. State the treatment you and other prisoners of war received at the bands ol the Confederate , authori ties? A. At Andersonville, rations of a very inferior quality of corn bread and bacon were furnished they were very badly cooked; the quantity would usually be a piece of bread four inches long, three wide and two thick, and we would get about two or three ounces of pork. ft. What was the effect of these rations upon the health ofthe prisoners? A. It was very injurious: they died in large numbers. Q. What was the average number of deaths during your stay there? A. The report for. August I under- stood; was 3044. Q. Were you in the open sun orundershelter? A. In the open sun. ft. What was the temperature of the atmosphere? A. It was extremely hot in the day and cool at night. Q. What was the character of the water they gave' you? A. The water was very poor; it was saturated with the filth and garbage of the cook-houses beiore it came into the grounds. Q. Was the character ofthe ground marshy? A. Yes; the creek ran through the centre ot it. Q. How far was it from Woodland? A. It appears that there was no woodland all around— in fact the stockade was made from wood taken out of it. Q. Was there higher ground around also? A. Some. higher. ft. Were you there during the cold weather? A. No; I was at Florence during the cold weather. Q Whatweretbe declarations madeby the keepers of the prison when complaints were made; did yon hear what was said by them? A. I never heard any thing at Andersonville. but at Florence I iheard some pretty hard threats; they threatened to starve us ben cause our array had made a raid through their country, and had destroyed food. ft. Didyou receive the same treatment at Florence as at Andersonville? A. Worse. ft. Was the amount of food given sufficient to. sustain life for any long time? A. No it was not; men who were without any extra means, money, trinkets* or watches, with which to purchase extra food, ran down upon it until they died; I had some money and bought some extra provisions, and so kept .my health tolerably good; the allowance I drew for ten days was two pounds of" meal; thethree weeks 1 was at Charles ton we were used very well, except that they shot down our men on any excuse. Q. Did this often occur? A. Yes. Q. Did it seem to be encouraged by the officers? A, It did seem tobe. ft. Did you know of any man beifig rebuked or pun ished for havingshotoneour men? A. No, never; the general report in camp was that every guard was al lowed thirty day's furlough for every man he shot; this was at Andersonville. By the Court.— Who was the officer in command at Charleston, when you were therein prison? A.Ican- not tell; I did not know. Testimony of John S. Toung. By Judge Holt. Q. Where do you reside ? A. In New York. Q. State whether you knew Robert Kennedy, who was bung in New York some time since. A. I did. ft, When was be hung? A. I think on ,%he 2oth of March last^ ft. State whether or not before his execution he made a confession, which was afterwards published in the papers ofthe country ? A. He did. ft. Have you that confession with you ? A. I have. Q. Did he make it to you? A. He signed a statement in my presence, but notthe confession. ft. To whom was tbe confession made? A. It was made. I believe, to Colonel Martin Burke, on duty at Fort Lafayette. The Judge Advocate-General said there was a mis take in summoning this witness, that he supposed the confession was made to him; he would, however, read the confession to the Court and let it be placed on record. The confession, as published in the papers, was then read. - TESTIMONY FO^S THE DEFENSE &E- SVMEO. Testimony of James II. Nothy. By Mr. Aiken.— ft. Where do you reside. A. About fifteen miles down in Prince George county. Q. state whether or not ypu purchased some land from Mrs. Surratt. A. I did; seventy-five acres, some years ago. ft.- Did Mr. Gwynn bring you a letter on the 14th of April last? A. He did. Q. Who was that letter from? A. From Mrs. Sur ratt. * ft. Have you been in the habit of meeting Mrs. Sur ratt at Surrattsville? A. Only that ohe time; she sent for me to come there; I owed her part of the purchase money, and sue wanted it settled; this letter was sent but on Friday; I did not see her that day at all. Testimony of Dr. John C. Thomas. By Mr. Stone.— Where do you reside? A. A.' Woodville. Prince George county. ' ft. What is your occupation? A. I am a physiclant 96 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON: ft. How long have you been, practicing? A, Nine teen years. ¦-ft. State whether you are a1 brother ofthe D. Thomas wholias been examined here as .a witness. A. lam. -ft. State whether your brother made any commu nication to yo on tbe subject of a conversation with Dr.' Mnddin relation to the assassination of the Presi dent? A.. Tbe conversation ; that, passed was at my house on Sunday morning; he came there to .Wood- ville, to church; I asked 'him the news; he was just from Bryantown tbe day, before/ and be was full of news: he was speaking of the arres t of Dr. Mudd; tbe finding of about at his house, &c; during tbe conver sation he repeated a remark that Dr. Mudd had made some weeks before; ft. State whether he had ever mentioned that con versation to you before that time? A. No; never be fore that time, ft. And this was after the assassination and after the arrest of Dr. Mudd? A. Yes: the soldiers were at Bry antown, and Dr. Mudd had been arrested, as I under stood; I had not heard anything of the boot before; my brother made an error as to the date, and I think he is satisfied of it. * , Q. I understand you, then, to say that was the first tlBne.y.ou ever heard your brother speak of that con versation, and tbat be did* not speak of it before the assassibation? A. He did not; that was the first time be mentioned it. fft. State Whether you have or not attended your brother prof essionally sometimes. A. I have in some serious attacks; he had a very serious paralysis attack with paralysis of body: he was for some time laboring under considerable nervous, depression, and was men tally affected by it, so that his mind was not exactly right for a longtime. ¦ft. State ^whether your brother's mind is nowVsound at all times? A. I am under the impression that it is not at all times. ft. When his mind isnot in its proper state, is he pot credulous, very talkative and unreliable? A. He is credulous and very talkative; very apt to tell every thing he hears, and believes everything he hears;, I do not pretend to say he would tell things he did not hour. Q. State whether, when his mind is not in aproper condition, his memory and reason are notboth some what affected. A. His reason maybe somewhat af fected, and memory also, when these attacks come on, but When be is in the enjoyment of good bealth he seems to be rational; he has not had an attack now for some time, and his health has been better. Cross-examined by Judge Bingham.— Q. State whe ther you know on what Sunday it . was that your brother made that statement in regard to Dr. Mudd; was it not Easter Sunday immediately following the assassination? A. I expect it was Easter Sunday; I thank it was somewhere about tbat time. ft. Now state what that conversation was ip respect to tbe President, Cabinet.and Union men of Maryland being assassinated within thirty days. A. He said that "Dr. Mudd saitl Lincoln and the whole Cabinet would be killed in a few weeks, and that he as well as thfe other Union men in Maryland would be killed; Mr. Wood was present at that time. ft. You are certain that in the same conversation be spoke of the boot being found" in Dr. Mudd's house? A> Yessir. >.-By the Court.— Q. On the day of this conversation are you certain your brother was in his right mind? A, He seemed to be. ft-sHewas not much excited? A. No. not at all. ft. Doyou think he was capable of telling the truth on that day?1 A. Yes. ft. From your knowledge of your brother's character for truth and veracity, of his mental condition, did you have any doubt in your mind that Dr. Mudd had said what he repeated to you? A. I thought probably my brother was jesting^at the time, and I observed that ii such was not the fact, he ought not to state it; he said it was certainly true, that he had made that statement to him In Bryantown; I supposed he bad told it as he beard it. Testimony of Samuel MeAll ister. By Mr. Stone.— ft. Where do you reside? A. In Washington. ft. How long bave you resided in Washington? A. Since the 2d day of December last. ft. What is your occupation? A. I am clerk in Penn sylvania House, Washington. Q. Have you the register of that house with you? A. I have, (producing the register). ft. State whether the name of Dr. S. A. Mudd ap pears on that register as having been entered inthe month of January, 1865. A. I have examined the month carefully, and the name does not appear. ft. Do you know the accused, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd? A- I do not; he may have stopped at the bouse, and if be did his name is on tbe register, as we do not allow any person to stop at the bouse without registering, Q.,Turp tptbe23d of December lastandstate whether ypu find the name pf Mudd? A. Yes sir; tbe name is i here, Samuel A. Mudd. ft. State whether you find the name of another man > 'named-Mood onthat day? A. Yes sir; J* T. Mudd. ; Q. What is the rule-of the house in regard to guests registering their,hames? >' ' Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham objected to the question. The-objection was overruled. tl A. All persons stopping at the hotel are required to register their names; often, persons come in and take meals; tbey do pot register their names, but .no person, stops in .the house over night without being required, to register. , By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— ft. Do yon know who slept in the room with Atzeroth on tho nigbtof the assassination? A, No sir; I was in bed at' the time Atzeroth came. ft. You do not know whether Dr. S. A. Mudd was in , the house or not in the month of January? A. Nosir,' his name is not on the register.' By the Court,— Do -you .know whether Dr. Mudd" might have,been in'tbe'jupuse^htieran assumed name? A. I could Pot tell anything about that. ft. Are you acquainted with. the person registered as Mudd? Nosir. Testimony of Jos. T. Mnckl. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. State whether you are acquainted with the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd? A. I am. ft. Where doyou reside? A. In tbe Fourth Electicfh District of Charles county, about a mile and a half; from the house ot Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. , Q. State whether you came with, the accused to Washington-last winter, and if you did, give thepar-i ticulars of your visit. ,A. I came with him to Wash-'. ington on the 22d .of December last; I recollect tho date from the fact that we returned home on Christ* mas eve. which wasthe24th. -¦ When we got to Washington welett ourhorses down" by the Navy -Yard'/ aiid walked up to Pennsylvania avenue: it was in the evening; we wentto.£he Pennsyl*' vauia House and registered' pur names, I think for lodgings; however, as wehad notbeen to dinner, we concluded that we wanted something better than an ordinary supper, so we went to a restaurant ohthe- avenue, known as" the Walker Restaurant; we ordered supper, and remained there possibly an hour; after* leaving there, we walked into Brown's Hotel, where westayed about half an hour: we then went into the National Hotel: there was a tremendous crowd in there, and we gdt separated: I recognized an ac quaintance in the crowd, and got into convert sation with himj after- that I came out of that place, and went along the avenue, stopping in1 several clothing StPres, for tbe purpose of looking at some clothing which I intended to purchase next morping; I then walked up to the PennsylvaniaHouse, and very soon after I arrived Dr. Mudd came; very soon after we went to bed; in the morning, after break fast, we went to tbe stbre of a man by the name of McGregor, I think, and purchased a cooking stove; we were together alter tbat onfce or twice during tbemorn- ing:I had clothing to buy, and some little purchases to make, which I attended to; T Saw the prisoner during- the morning repeatedly; every five or ten minutes I would be with him; about one o'clock we left tbe ave-' nue, and came down to the Navy Yard, got our horses, and between two and three o'clock went home; we came and returned together. ft. Were you in the Pennsylvania House when tbe prisoner rejoined you, after your separation from him at the National? A. I was sitting near the fire-place in the front room as |you enter, nearthe office where ft be register is kept; Dr.'Mudd, when I first saw him came through the folding door into this room from the Other room. ¦ ft: Was any one with him*as he entered? A. I think not; there might have been but I saw none. Q. You say you were not separated from him the next niqrning more than fiveor ten minutes at a time? A. I think not; alter the purcbas6 of the stove hehad some shoes and some little things to buy and We sepa-i rated, but I saw him frequently; once, I think, he was coming from the-Bank of Washington, where he had some litt' e business. ft. Do you know by .whom the articles bought by him were taken to hishouse? Judge Bingham objected to this question as being of no cobsequence: a Mr. Ewing said he thought it a matter of much con sequence.' The prosecution had proved by one witness a meeting between Booth and Mudd bete in Washing ton, and the defense expected to be able to show cbtP clusively that if there was any such meeting it must have been at this visit; therefore tbe necessity of show^ ing that the accused came hereon business uncon nected with Bpoth; that the meeting with Booth had PeeuJJ1#in.8Ild^ce. as a part of the*conSpiracy, anft tne f eiblIst nad a ngbt t0 show by tn® acts of the ac cused that he came to Washington on a purely legitiJ mate business visit. ¦ ' b Judge Bingham replied that the interview alleged to have 'taken place in Washington, between Mudd and Bo°?3n^s*ln another month from that .here design *a£?Aand t»ne' afcte™Pt t0 show the purchase of certain SnSS^^?? f IeWJlD* connected with their trans? portation to the bpiise ofthe prisoner, would, if d nn thoS'i^111 ™roWlngrn(rt additional light whatever °i?«i.esu^ect- Tne objection was not sustained arid the question was repeated . A. I took home a portion cf his purchases myself; the stove was to have been TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 97 taken borne by a Mr. Lucas, who was then in market with his wagon; I went twice with Dr. Mudd and twiee by myself: Mr. Lucas said that if he sold out his load of poultry he would take tbe stPve down, and If he did not he would not be able to take it down that trip. Q. Are you well acquainted with Dr. Samuel Mudd? A. I am; I have known him from early youth. Q. Do yon know his general Character in the neigh^ borhood in which he resides for peace, order and good citizenship? A, It is exemplary; I think I never beard anything to the contrary: he is of an amiable disposition, a good citizen and a good neighbor, besides being honest and correct. ¦ft.' Do you know bis character in the neighborhood ss a master of hisslaves? A. I do; I have lived close by him all my life, and believe him to be humane and kind; I never thought his niggers done a great deal of work, but, have always considered that thev were treated very humanely. Q. Do you know of Booth's having been in that country? A. 1 do: I saw him at church; that is, I saw a stranger there, and I asked who, he was, and was toidit was Booth, a great tragedian; from the de scription given ofhim, and the photograph, I am satis fied itwas thesame man; that was in the latter part of November or early in December. ft. Do you know on what business Booth wasin that coPntry? A. Only from the common talk, whatlheard others say. ft. What was the comm on talk ? • Judge Bingham objected to the question. lilr. Ewingsaid that he knew it was the object of tbe Government to give the accused here liberal opportu nities of presenting their -defense, andhetlid not think the Judge Advocate intended, by drawing tightly the rules of evidence, to shut out .evidence which might fairly go torelievetheaccusedoftheaccLisationsagainst them. It was better not only for them but for the Go vernment whose majesty had been violated tbat there Should be great liberality in' allowing tbe accused to present whatever evidence they might offer. The de fense wished to sbowth'at Booth was in the country Ostensibly according to the common understanding of the neighborhood,forthe purpose of investing in lands. This was introduced as explanatory1 of his meeting With Dr. Mudd, whose family, as the defense expected to show, were large landholders and anxious to dis pose oftheir lands. Judge Advocate Holt stated that he was in favPr of afllowmg the accused to indulge in the utmost latitude tyf inquiry, and that when he fell short of maintaining thatspirit he would be Pbligedif the Court would do it for Mm.1 Ibr-this instance, however, a mere idle ru mor in regard to which a cross-examination conld not be made, was not, in his opinion, properly admissible. The objection was sustained, and the question was not put. Cross-examined by Jtfdge Holt.— ft. Do you know .jEbe reputation or the prisoner, Dr. Mudd, for loyalty to the Gpvernment.of the United States? A. I really oonotsofarasmy ownkPOwledgegoes;! bave never kaowpof any disloyal act of his: ' ft. Have ydu ever beard any disloyal sentiment ex pressed by him? A. No sir; I have heard him express sentiments in opposition to the policy of tbe Admin istration. ft. Do you know that he has been opposed to the action of the .Government of the United States m its endeavors to suppress this Rebellion, and that his op position toithasbeen open and undisguised? A. No air; I do not know that. , Q. Doyou know that be has constantly held that the State of Maryland had been false to her duty in not :ping witb the other States in Rebellion against the jpvernment? A. I have never hearcl him say so. • ft. Have you not from time to time seen Confede^ late officers about bis house? A. Never sir. ft. You spoke of his amiability towards his servants, did you ever hear of bis'fchooting any of them? A. I tiave heard of it.1 , ft. Have you any doubts of its- truth? A. No sir. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. 'State what you heard about his fchboting his slave. A. I beard that his servant was obstreperous; that he ordered his servant to do some thing which he not only refused to do, but started to go away: Dr. Mudd had his. gun with bim, andhe thought he would 'shoot Bim to frighten him; I heard , him say so myself:' he shot him somewhere in tbe calf oftheieg. ' ' ft Wasitwithashot-gtrn? A. Yes sir. . >. ft. Didyou evei, hear ahytningoftbeservant having attacked hito with a currycomb? A. I do not think I ever heard that;,! heard but little about the matter. Q. Didyou bear that his Servant's leg was broken by tbe shot? jA. Nosir; Ibeard it was a flesh wound. - ft. You speak of having heard him express himself in opposition to the policy of the Administration; did he express himself with any violence? A. No, sir, I never knew him to make, use .of any expression in ffen'tlemen's company which could not be admissable n ladies' society. ft. Did he ever talk mueh in opposition to the Ad ministration? A. I never beard him talk a great deal in opposition to the Administration except with refer ence to the emancipation policy* GJ Testimony of Francis &ncas. By Mr. Ewing. —ft. Where do you live and what oc cupation, were you engaged in last.Deceir.ber? A.I ljve In Charles county, near Bryantown. Md., and was and have been a huckster for several years. . , ft. State whether there was any arrangement made between you and Dr. Mudd astocarryiPgsbme articles from,this city down home for him last December? A. On Christmas eve Dr. Mudd came to me in market and asked me to take a stove home for bim; he came to me several times^ and I promised to do it if I could.'; Testimony of John C. Thompson. By MK $tdne.r-Q. Where did you reside last Fall? A. At Dr. Queenrs,in Charles county. ,Q. Didyou know. Wilkes Booth? A. I had a slight acquaintance with a man bearing that name. ft. State how, tha.^acquaiptance commenced? A. I was introduced to a man styling himself Booth; I do not know whether the. name was Wilkes Booth or not, byDr. ftueen.ihy brother-in-law; I think that was in October or Noyember last. Q, Was this introduction given tc you byDr. ftueen atbishousel A. Yessir; Booth came there, I think, on a Saturday night. , ft. Had any ot tbe family there known bim pre viously? A. I think I can say with certainty that none ofthe .family ever ne_ard ofhim before. Q. State how he got admission there? A. Dr. Queen's son; Joseph Queen; brought him there lrom Bryatt- town. Q. Where is tDr. Queen now, and what is his condi tion? A. He is at his place, in Charles county; be is a very old man,, being seventy-four years of age, bed ridden and infirm. Q. Did this man Booth bring any letters of -introduc tion to Dr. ftueen? A. I think he brought a. letter from somebody in Montreal: if I am not mistaken it was from a^nan by tbe name of Martin. Q. Did you see the letter? A. I hardly glanced over the letter, and paid very little attention to it ; as well as,I remember, itwas simply a letter of introduction to Dr. ftueen, saying that this man Booth wanted, to see the country. Q. State whetber you were present at the first con versation between Dr. Samuel A. Mudd and this map Booth? A. On Sunday morning, this man Booth, De, ftueen and myself went to ihe church at Bryantown apd I introduced Booth to D r. Mudd. Q. State what was Booth's ostensible object in visit ing the country? A., Itwas for the purpose of purchas ing land: that I am confident of, as he so stated ,to me: heaskedmethepriceof land in that section, and I told him as well as I knew tbat the land varied in price from five to fifty dollars per acre, according to the quality and situation and the improvements upon tbe land. ft. Did he make any inquiriesof you as to who had laud f 01 sale? A. Yes; I think I told him I did, no* know who had land for sale, but that Mr. Henry Mudd, the father of the accused, was a large property bolder, and he (Booth) might purchase land from him. ft. Did he make any inquiry as to distances from tbe river? A. As well as I remember he did make in quiries of me about the roads in Charles county, but I was not informed in regard to roads there; the only Toad of which I had any knowledge was the road from Washington, known as the Stage RPad. leading down to Bryan to wn;he asked me in regard to.the roads leading to tbe PotPmac River; I told hinl * was hot Conversant with these roads; that I knew them as far as Allen's Fresh nd Newport, but no farther. ft. Did Booth make any Inquiries as to the purchase of horses in the neighborhood? A. I think he did; I think be asked me if there were any horses in the neighborhood for sale; I told- him I did not know; that the Government had been purchasing horses.- Q, State whether the meeting of Booth, Dr. ftueen and yourself with Dr. Mudd at church was casual. A. It was simply accidental. ft. Where did you meet Booth? A. In the church yard in front of the church door, where the male por tion ofthe congregation are in the habit of assembling just previous to Divine service: I happened to see Dr. Mudd therewith various other gentlemen, and I in troduced him to tbe others present; I had no idea as to what theman's business there was lurther than that he was a purchaser of lands; > I think he told me the night before he had made aspeculation or was a share- bolder in an enterprise in Western Pennsylvania somewhere, and, as far as Lremember, told me hehad made a good deal of money out of these operations. t ft. Did Booth stay af Dr. Queen's house during tbat visit? A. I think he stayed there that night and tbe next day. . „ . _ ... , _ Q. Didyou ever see Booth again? A. I think I saw bim again about the middle ot December following; he came to Dr. Queen's a second time and stayed all night, and left very early the_next morning; I did not see him after that. . _ , ^ - Cross-examined by Assistant Judge Advocate Bur nett.— ft. How near do you live to Dr. Mudd? A. I think the distance is about seven or eight miles. ft. Is your acquaintance witb Dr. Samuel A. Mudd 98 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. and his affairs ol a very intimate character ? A. I am not Intimately acquainted with him; I know him personally. ft. You say that Booth spoke of purchasing lands. A. Yessir; I told him that Mr. Henry Mudd, the father of the accused, was an extensive land holder, and he would probably be able to purchase lands from him. '¦¦ " ]] 'ft. He did not in that conversation say anything to you about purchasing laud from Dr. Samuel MPdd? A. Nosir. Q. Do you know whether Dr. Samuel Mudd owns any land there? A. lamnotpositiveastothat. , By "Mr. Stone.— ft. Who lives nearest to this city, Dr. ftueen or Dr; Mudd? A. I think Dr. Mudd lives the nearest. . By the Court.— Q. Did you see the name attached to tb^letter of which you have spoken? A. Yes sir; I think the name was Martin; I do not know the chris tian name. ft. YO'u have never heard ofthe man whose name wasuslgiied to that letter? A. I did not. . ft. Did Booth, to your knowledge; eVe'rbuy any land in Maryland on the strength of that letter ot introduc tion? A. Not to my knowledge. The Court adjourned till to-morrow morning. Washington-, May 27.— After tbe , evidence taken yesterday bad been read, the following witnesses were to-day called for the prosecution :— Testimony of George F. Edmonds. By Judge Advocate Holt.— Q. What is your profes sion? A. Counsellor at Law; Q. State whether or not in the trial which recently occurred in Canada of certain offenders, known as the St. Albans raiders, yon appeared as ccuhsel fpr tbe Government of the United States. A. I had charge of the matter for'the Government ofthe United States. ft. State whether in tbe performance of yourprpfes- sionaldutiesthere.youmadetheacquaintanceof Jacob Thompson, William O. Cleary, Clement C. Clay, George N. Sanders, and others of that clique? A. In the sense in which the term is generally understood, I did not; I knew these persons by their being pointed out to me daily; , I .did not have tbe hohor, if it may be called, of their acquaintance. ft. Were the defendants in court? A. They were. Q. Were they engaged as officers of the Confederate Government in defending these raiders? A. They seemed to exercise the functions, and recognized each other accordingly. ft. Mention the persons whom you met there, apd who were so recognized. A, Ido not think I saw Mr. Thompson moie than-once; IsawC. C.Clay during the early part ofthe proceedings almost daily, and Mr. Sanders during the whole of the period; Mr. .Cleary, whom you mentioned, I saw'to know at a later period, when he was examined as a witoess oh the part ofthe defendant. ft. Did he represent, in his testimony en that trial that these persons were engaged in the Confederate service, and that this raid was made under authority ofthe Confederate Government ? He so represented, as did all those persons, and they stood upon that de fense. ft. Will you look at this paper and state whetber or : not you have seen theoriginalof the document ? A. I have seep tbe original. , ft., Was it pr was it not given in evidence on.the trial to which you refer.? A. It was given in evidence on the trial on the part of the defendants. ft. Given in evidence by them as a general docu ment? A. It Was. Q. Is tbat a correct copy ? A. I cannot swear that it ! is an exact copy, but I examined the original very1 carefully, and I am able to swear that itisasubstantial copy, and I have no doubt it is a literal eppy.' The paper was then given in evidence, and was read, as follows :— ' Confederate States oy America^ War Depart ment, Richmond, Va.. June Hi, 1864.— To Lieutenant Bennett H. Young— Lieutenant: --You have been ap pointed, temporarily. First) Lieutenant in the Provi sional army for special service. You will proceed without delay to the British Provinces, where you will report to Messrs. Thompson tfcClay for instructions. You will, under tbeir directions, collect such Conlede- rate soldiers who have escaped from the enemv not exceeding tweuty In number, a3 you may deem suita ble lor the purpose, and will executesuch enterprises as may be entrusted to you. You will take care to ' commit no violation of tbe'local law, and to obev inv plicitlytheir instructions. Youand vourmen will re ceive from these gentlemen transportation and tbe customary rations and clothing, or the commutation therelor. (Signed) JAMES A. SEDDON, Secretary of War. ft. Was the Young referred to in that connection one of the St. Albans raiders? A. I do not know that I cap answer that question literally; he produced that docu ment andprotested to be the person. ft. He was op trial as such? A. Pie was on trial as such, and produced that document as his authority , fojr the acts he had committed. The testimopyofthe witness havipg been concluded, Judge Advocate Holt stated tbatsihee closing tbecase opthe'part ofthe Government so far as concerned the individual prisoners, he had discovered an impo> tant withes?, before unknown to liim, whose examina tion he desired should now be made. Mr. Ewing inquired as to which of the prisoners tb» proposed testimony was likely to affect? Judge Holt replied that it referred directly to the case of Atzeroth. Mr. Dostersaid that be bad not opened the defense for Atzeroth, and, therefore, would not, object to the reception of the testimony. The witness was then called' and testified as fol lows:— Testimony of Colonel William St. Nevins. By, Judge Advocate Holt.— ft. Where do you reside? A. In,>iew York. ft. State whetber or not you were in this city in tfi* month of April last, and if so, on what day? A. I was here pn-the 12th of April; I think I recollect the day froni the 'fact that a pass which I received from the War Department bears that date. Q. Where did youetop in this city? A. At the Kirk- wood House.- , Q.- .Lookat the prisoners at tbe bar and seewhettfer you recognize either of them as a person whom yob met in that house on that day? A. That one tbera (pointing to Atzeroth), I think he is the man. ft. State under what circumstances you met hlrp.ana what be said to you? A. Hehadon acoatdarkerthaf that: a£ I was coming out he askedme if I knew wherfc the Vice President's room was, and I told him thai the Vice President was then at dinner; there was no one there tben-except him and me. ft. D.d he ask where the room of Vice President Johnson was?, A. Yes sir; that was his first question; I did not know the number of the Vice Presidents room, but I kpew it was on the right band side next the parlor; however. I said to him, "the Vice President is eating his dinner." Q. Did you then part with him, or where did he go? A. I passed on. Q. Didyou leave, hfm standing tbere. or did he go away? A. Weil, he. looked in the dining room; I do notknow whether he wept in ornot. ft. You say you pointed out the room tohim?^ A, Yes, sir. Q. Was, the room in view from where you pointed It out? A. Yessir; it was on the passage as you go inro the dining room, and between that and the stepsaa you go dowp to tbe dining room is where this man met me. Cross-examined by Mr. Doster.— Q. What tirrie of day was this? A. I think it was between four and five o'clock; there' was no other person at dinner but the Vice President himself; I was going away at the timeT and was in a great hurry. ft. Whereabouts in tbe building didtbis conversation take place? A. In tbe passage leading into the dining- room. ¦ ,.---¦. Q. Did the prisoner look into the dining-room? A. Frpm the passage you cannot look into it, but by going dowua few steps you can.see in. ft. I understood you to say that be looked intotUB dmipg-room? A, ,1 pointed to the Vice President, Mr. Jpbnson, who w^s sitting at the far end with a yellow- 1 ooking man standing behind him. : ft. What length ot time was occupied in this con versation? A. Ido pot suppose over three minutes. Q. Have you seen the prisoner since that time until yousaw him to-day? A. Nosir. , Or, Describe the ,dress and appearance of the pri- sober? A. I was in a hurry when I met the prisoner andam therefore unable to give a very minuted^ senption of his, dress; it was dark; he had on a lev* crowned black, hat, but it is his countenance by which I now recognize bim. ft. State to the Court your age. A. I was born on February 22d,',1803. By Judge ^dvpeate Holt.— Q. State whetber or not incoming into the presence of tbe prisoner, Atzeroth, this morning, you recognized him at once, without hia beingpointed out to.you.. A. I recognized him witbr out his being pointed out to me. ft. No indication as to the person was made to you? A. Nosir. ¦ Testimony of Bettie Washington, (Co lored). By Mr. Stone.— ft. State where you reside. A. I live at Dr. Samuel Mudd's; have been living there Since tbe Monday after Christmas. e mS^Xk^ you«a ^1^eb.el2re tne Emancipation Pro clamation was issued? A. Yes, sir [In- reply to a series of questions propounded to her. the witness then testified IP substance that she had not been absent from the house of the prisoner. Dr. Samuel Mudd, for a single night since she first took up her abode with him until she came to Washing- TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. (-') TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 99 ton: tbat during .that time the prisoner had been ab sent, from home op three separate occasions; first at Mr. George Henry Gardner's party j where he staid late in the evening; second, at Glesboro". where he went to buy some horses: and third, to Washington, from which place he returned on the day after bis' leaving home. ft.. Did you see the men called HaroldVand Booth? A. I saw only one of them, the small one; I\vas standing atthe kitchen window, and just got a glimpse ofhim as hewas going in the direction of the swamp. ft, I-luw long after you saw liim did you see Dr. Mudd? A. I did not see Dr. Mudd with the man; I saw Dr. Mudd about three or tour minutes afterwards at the irpnt door. , ..A photograph of Booth was here exhibited to the witness, but she failed to identify the likeness as that of any one she had ever seen. During a brief cross-examination, conducted by As sistant Judge Advocate Bringbum. the witness testi fied that an interval of about a week Or two took place between tbepiisoner's departure lrom home, and that his brother occompanied him on these occasions. Re-exainination of Jeremiah T. Mudd, By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Are you acquainted with the handwriting of the accused, Samuel A. Mudd? A. Yes sir. ft. State whether you see his handwriting on that page (exhibiting 10 witness the register or'the Pennsyl vania Hotel at Washington, on the page -headed Fri day, December 2X 1864)? A. I do. ¦ft. Do youknow at what hotel in Washington the prisoner w.'.s in the habit of stopping? A. Ido not. ft Are you acquainted with Daniel G. Thomas, who has been a witness i or the prosecution? A. I am. ft. Do you know his reputation in the neighborhood in which he lives for truth and veracity? A. I do; it is bad. Q. From your knowledge of his reputation for truth would you believe him under oath? A. I do not think I could: it has been my impression that — Judge Bingham.— You need not state your impres sions. ' Mr. EwiPg— Proceed with your answer. A. I have just stated that I did not think I could. Cross-examined by Assistant Judge Advocate Bing ham.— ft. Do you base his general reputation upon yourpersonal knowledge and acquaintance with him? A. Yes sir, and upon what I generally heard spoken by others. -ft. What do you say that you generally heard spoken by others in regard to his reputation for truth? A. Thatit was pretty bad. ft. How many people did you ever hear speak of his general reputation for truth before the taking of this testimony the other day? A. I heard several speak of it. • ft. How many, ten? A. I think so: I will not say positively; I am.speaking now from what I have heard generally. * f ft; Can you name the ten? A. I really do not know. Q. Canyou name half of tbe ten? A. I think I can; I might name a dozen. Q. Well, who are they? A. Imight name Dr. George Mudd for one. ft. When didyou hear Dr. George Mudd speak on tbe subject? I heard him speak of it as late as two years ago'. Q. Wnat did he say of the general character of tbe witness ior truth? A. That it was bad; that he did not beiieve his general character for truth was good, ft How did he come to say that? A. It was in con nection with some matters that occurred about the time of stationing Colonel Birney down there. Q. You did not understand that Thomas was op posed to Colonel Birney? A. Not at all; I simply men tion that as being about the 'time. Q. Stateall the circumstances in that connection? A. It was about the fact of Thomas hav.ngamannamed P.iyne arrested there— tor what I do not know; the man who was arrested had a brother in the Rebel army, aud some of bis brother's friends came to his house. ft. Then the arrest was made on the charge of en tertain ingiRebel soldiers? A. Yes sir; I presume it was. , ;Q. Was that the only man whom -you overheard as sails this man's character for truth? A. I believe there were others. ft. Who were the others? A. I do not know tbat I can name them. Q. If you cannot name two men who ever assailed his character for truth, how can you come to the con clusion tbat his general reputation for truth is bad? A. Wed, I heard a number say so. By the Court.— ft. What relation are you to the pri soner? A. My father and his father were cousins. ;tj. Have you been Intimate with bim? A. Mode rately so ; we met frequently, as I live in his neighbor hood. By Mr. Stone.— Q. Have you been In the habit of serving on tbejuriesin tbe county where you live? A. I'have. 'frequently. * ft. State whether Mr. Thomas has not frequently been a witness in court when you were present? A. I do not recollect of bis baying been a witness in court. By Judge Bingham.— ft. Have you heard any one assert tbat Mr. Thomas ever swore falsely in court? A. No, sir. ft. Are you aware of the fact that he has been a sup porter of tbe Government and has acted as an official for the Government since the Rebellion broke out? A. Yes, sir. Q. Awe you aware of another fact, that a very con siderable portion of the people in St. Charles county are reputed somewhat disloyal and-a good deal favor able to this Rebellion? A. I am aware that several young men from our section have gone into the RebeXariny. ft: Yes; and many of those left behind have been making a good deal of c amor: bave they not acted against tbe Government, andin favor of tbe Rebellion9 A. Not to any great extent. Q. That is the general report. Is it not? A. Well; yes sir. ft. Are not tbe men who have spoken against this man Thomas of that class who bear the general repu tation of being against tbe Government? A. I really do not know. Q. Have you any knowledge of Rebels being fed and concealed in that neigbboi hood by the residents there? A. I have not; I have seen men in Bryantown passing and repassing who I was told were Rebels; as to their being led or concealed in my immediate neighborhood I have no knowledge. By Mr. Ewing.— ft. You have spoken of Dr. George Mudd as one ot the men who said that he regarded the reputation of Thomas for veracity as bad; state whetber Dr George Mudd is a Rebel sympathizer or not. A. I regard him as having been, throughout this war, as strong a Union man as any in the United States; I never heard him express the slightest sympa thy with the Rebellion. ft. What -is his reputation for loyalty? A. I think there would be very little difficulty in establishing the fact of its being very good; he is so regarded univer sally. By Judge Bingham.— Q. Did you ever hear Dr. Geo. Mudd say anvthing against tbe Rebellion? A. Very often. By Mr. Stone.— Q. Did Mr. Daniel Thomas hold any position upder tbe Government? A. He said that be Was a detective. ft. Do you know such to be the fact from any other source than himself? A. I do not. ft. Under whose orders did he claim to have been acting? A. I think under Colonel Holland, the Pro vost Marshal of our district. IS.e-examinn.tion of Benjamin F. Gwynn. By Mr. Ewing— ft. Ptate whether last summer, in company with Captain White, from Tennessee, Cap- tainPerry, Lieutenant Perry, Andrew Gwynn, George Gwynn, or either of them, you were about Dr. Samuel A. Mudd's house for a number of days. A. Ineversaw any of these parties except AndrewGwynn and-Gebrge Gwynn, and have not been in Dr. Mudd's bouse since abouttbeistot November. 1861, nor nearer to it than! tbe church since tbe Cth of November, lsei. ft. State what occurred in 1861, when yon were in the neighborhood of Dr. M dd's house. A. I was with my brother, Andrew J. Gwynn, and Jerry Dyer; about that time General Sickles came over into Maryland, arresting everybody; I was threatened with arrest, and left the neighborhood to avoid it; Iwentdownto Charles county and stayed with my friends there, as everybody else was doing; there was a good deal of running around about that time. Mr. Ewing— Go on and tell all about it. Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham objected to tho witness being allowed to state anything further on this point, as it was not in issue what was done in 1861. Mr. Ewing said the prosecution had shown by four or five witnesses that a party, of whom the witness on tbe stand was one, had been collected in tbe pine woods in the neighborhood of Dr. Mudd's house, having their meals brought to them by his servants; andbad also attempted to show that these persons were in the Con federate service, and that Dr. Mudd was guilty of trea son in attempting to secrete them. It the defense showed that this was not done last year, it would not be a complete refutation of the testimony, because it may be alleged to have been done previously. The defense wished to show that this concealment was the concealment of'a much smaller party than was stated, and of men who were not in the Confederate service. and also that it occurred at another time from that stated. To deny the accused this opportunity would be to withhold a most legitimate line of de.ense, and to refuse to allow him to refute the whole mass of loose testimony of ignorant servants (ignorant as to dates), would be most unjust. Judge Bingham contended that there was no color of excuse for the attempt to introduce testimony in regard to the year 1861. The reason why the objection was not made sooner was because the prosecution had been unable to perceive the purpose ofthe counsel for the defense in following such a course. It was proper for them to swear this witness as to his whereabouts, so as to contradict the testimony of Mary Simms, who 100 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON: had sworn to having seen him last summer. Togo further than that was not legitimate- If this course was persisted in, and every witness called in regard to 1861 was to swear deliberately and maliciously liaise, there would be no power in the court to punish them for perjury, lor the simple, reason that there was no issue be. ore the Court, either in the evidence adduced pr in the charges and -specifications which , would au thorize any ipquiry about it. The objection was sustained. Tbe Commission then took a recess until 2 o'clock, at which time the body reassembled. Re-examination of Benjamin F. Gwynn. Continued. By Mr. Ewing.— ft. State where the party of whom you have Spoken as being in the pines S°t their meals and slept. A. They slept ,m the barn, near the spring, bnbedding furnished from Dr, Mudd's. and were fur nished wiLh meals byDr. Mudd; we remained, there about four or fiVe daysr , Q. State the circumstances of your being there and what occurred. A. As I said before, I went down there and stayed around the neighborhood, part of tbe;tiiiie at Dr. Mudd's house and part of the time elsewhere;, he gave us something to eat, and some bed clothing. . ft. Were you and the party with you in his house during the time,you were there ? A. Yes sir, almost every day. I think. ft. Where were your horses ? A. At the stable, I thick; I do not know who attended to,them. ft. Do you know vvhere .John 1-1. Surratt was at that thne ? A. I think he was at college. 1(, Q. Do you know whether there were apy charges, against you and the party that were there? A. I came Up tp Washington about the first of November, and gaVe' myself up, having got tired ot staying away; they administeredtp me the ,oath, and I then wcpt'bopie; I think they said there bad not been any charges against nle. ft. What induced the party to go to the pines to sleep? A. To avo-d arrest. I did. ( - , ft." What reason had you, for supposing you would be arrested? A. Almost everybody in our neighborhood was being arrested, and I understood I would be, too; so I went, down there. ft. Have you seen Surratt in Charles county since? A. I bave not; I wish, to fctate here that itwas not in November I slept in the pines', it was in August. , ft. ,You spoke of Andrew J. Gwynn being there, with you; will you state where he has been since?, A. He has been South. Q. What relation do you bear to him? A. He is my brother; he lives in Prince George's county, some eight miles from my house. ' Q. Did you hear of Andrew J. Gwynn being in that section since 1861? A. I heard be was there some time during last winter. I think.1 Q. What time in 18G1 did he goSouth? A. In August. Cross-examined by Judge Advocate Holt.— ft. You spoke of the universality ,of arrests in 1861; did you understand that they were confined to persons sus pected of disloyalty and .disloyal practices? A. They, were, genera] ly;. there , were' several volunteer com panies there whose members' were arretted. Q. Were those companies organized for the defense of the United States. A. They were commissioned by Governor Hicks,., , ; Q. On what grounds, did you suppose you would, be: arrested? A. I was 4- captain of a company down there. J ft. Organized for wbat purpose? A, It was called a bomeguard, and was raised ior the purpose of protect ing the .neighbors; at that time there was a good deal of -disaffection among the blacks; it'wasiho'ught' to boa proper time for raising companies through the coun try; I tbereipre petitioned Governor Hicks, and he gave mea commissidn. ft. Was it not understood they1 were organized to stand by the State in any disloval; position she might Jake against the Government ofthe United States? A. Yea sir, I so understood it; tbey arrested Several members of my company, and, as I understood there Was a warrant for my airest, I left. ft., You slept inthe pines for the sole purpose of es caping arrest? A- Yes sir. ft. Di\ Mpdd,I,suppo3e, concurred fully hi your sen timent and the sentiments which porvad6d the local organizations? A. I do not, know what his sentiments were at the time. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. When was this company, of which you were.captain, organized? ' A. I think in the iall of 1850 or winter of I'jGII. Q. Beiore or alter the electlon'of Mr.' Lincoln? A. I do not know; I think we commenced to organize our company before that, but were not fully organized until alter that time. Q. How far was the locality of this organization from Dr. Mudd's place? A. About ten miles. , Q, Do you knpw whetber Dr. Mudd was a member pf any of those Volunteer companies? A. I think be was a member of a company gotten up in Bryantown. ft. Are you sure Pf that? A. 1 dO Pot kuPw' posi tively ; I think so. Testimony of Jerry ©yer. Examined by Mr. Ewing.— Q. State where you live. A. I live in Baltimore: ' ¦ ' ' • ft. State where you lived prior to that. A. In Charles; ft. Do you know the prisoneri.Dr. Samuel A. Mudd? A. Yes sir ' ¦ ft. How far from the house of Dr. Mudd? A. About a mile and a half in a direct line. ft. When did you leave your residence in Charles; county? A. In May, two years ago. < Q. State hdw long beiore you went to Baltimore you had lived in Charles county. A. I was raised there. ¦ ft. State Whether you knew Sylvester Eglan, who has been on the witness stand. A. Ido not know him by that name; be was called ' El; he is a little boy, a servant ofthe father of Dr. Mudd. '' Q. Do you know his brother Frank? A. Yes. ft. Do you know Dick Gardner or "Luke Gardner? A. Not by that name; I knew Dick and Luke Washington, who, I presume, ere the Ones you mean: ft. State whether in August, 1803, atthe house of the accused. Dr. Mudd, under ah oak tree, when you was in conversation with Walter Bowie and the accused, the accus'edtsaid he would- send Sylvester Eglanabd • his brother Frank, and others of his servants, to Rich mond. A, I'Taever had auy such conversation with , him in my life, andin August I was not in the county;' , I went to Baltimore the first day of August, and re mained until October.' whfen hearing that some of my hands had left the farm, I went down to see about car-- rying on the farm; aboutthiny or forty hands left the neighborhood about that timV. ¦ •< .> ft. APd you never, at that or any 'other time, heard him threaten to send any of his servants to Richmond?} A. Never; I heard, when I got down in the county, that such a report had been started there by a certain* man in the neighborhood; I never heard Dr. Mudd say any- such thing. . > ft. Did you ever meet Dr. Mudd in company with Walter Bowie? A. Not that I know of. ft. Can you say that you never met Dr. Mudd in com pany with Walter Bowie at the house of Dr. Muddta father? A. lam satisfied I never did; I recollect about two years ago, in the fall of PjG2 or spring of 18G3. when* some one rode into the lanet I turned and asked who that-was coming; he said:— '-That is Walter Bowie; I wonder wbathe wants here?" and turned and- went into the house; he stayed about for some minutes, jnud; then went away; I don't recollect whether Dr. Mudd was thereor not; my impression is he was not. ft. Do youknow Andrew Gwynn? A. Very well. ft. Doyou know where he has been since 1«61? A. He has baen tn tbe Rebel army. ft. Have you ever seen him since 1861? A. I have' not. ¦¦ -^r Q. Did you meet him with Surratt and Dr. Blanford at the bouse of Dr. Mudd? A. Never; I never saw Surratt there in my life; the only time I saw him at all was coming-in to Bryantown some two or three years ago. ft. Do you know whether or not any. of Surratt's family were in Bryantown then? A. He had a sister there at school. , ... ft. Did you last year see Surratt drive up to the bouse of Dr Mudd^s lather, and take his horse out of the busgy? A. I did not. ft. Areyou acquainted with the witness Miles Simms? A. Yes.I know him; he used to. live wjtp Dr. Lxcdd. , Q. Do you know Rachel Spencer, Elvina Washing- toil!, Elge Eglan, and Mary Simms? A.' Yes. ft. State'whethcrany oi them were servants of Dr. Mudd in 1861. A. I think they all were; I know I bought the woman Elvina about i860 or 1861. ¦ft. State whether you were at Dr. Mudd's house, or in tbeneighhor.jooci. with BenGrosun.in the summer! of 1861 ? A. I was in September, isi;l. ft. How long were you at the house? A. We were in the neighborhood about a, week. Q. What^ were you doin*? A. We were knocking about in theibushes and pines; there was a report that everybody was to be arrested; tbey were arresting a great many men in tbat neighborhood; Mr. Gwynn came down and, said they bad been to the house to ar rest us; I also rccetved notice that I was tobe: nested* I came to Dr. Mudd's and stayed about there, sleep'ng in tho pines between his nouse and mine several nights; we were two nights very near his spring, i Q. Where did youget your bed clothing? A. At Dr. Mudd'ti house. ft. Where did you get your meals? A. When we! were pear his house Dr. Mudd brought- the meals in; a part dt tbe time we were on the opposite side of the swamp; while we were on this side we were about two hundred yards from bis (Dr. Mudd's) house; he would sometimes bring down a baskot,-with bread, meat, whisky, Ac., aud the girl (Mary Semmes) sometimes brought coffee. & Who took care of the horses of tbe party? A. I believe the horses were leit atDr. Mudd's stable, and suppose the boy Milo took oare of tnem; he was about there. Qi .State how the parties were dressed?. A.- Tbey had on citizep'selolhes. ',, ' " ; Q. Who composed the party? A. Ben, Gwynn. Aril drew Gwynn, and myself. vrw*«". -*w. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 101 Q. Were apples and peaches ripe about that time? A. It was about peach season. ft. Do you know whether a watch was kept at Dr. Mudd's house when you were there? A. I ; ecollect telling the children to keep a lookout and let Pic know. ¦fti'Do youknow whether Albion Brooke was about the house at tbat time? A. I think he was not living there, but he often came across there. Q, Do you know whether there was &ny warrant for your arrest on any charges against ypu? A. I do not; there was a genera} stampede of people, and a great excitement in that Whole community. ft. Do ycu know Daniel S. Thomas, one of the wit nesses for the prosecution? A. I have known liim quite iptimately since he was a boy; «C have seen much ofhim i'or the last two or th ree years. ft. Areyou acquainted with the reputation in which he is held in the community in which he lives for vera city? A. I only know from public rumor; there are very few who have apy confidence in him. Q. From your knowledge of his1 reputation for vera city would you believe him under oath? A. I would not. Q. Are you acquainted with the accused, Dr. Mudd? A. Ye ; 1 have known him from a boy. Q._Wn;.t is hisgeneial refutation ior order and good citizenship. A. 1 have never heard the shgheit think againsc him: he has always been regarded as a good citizen, asamauofpea.ee; I have never known him have any dimculty, but have always' regarded him as a peaceable, quiet citizen. " ft. What ii his reputation as a master over his ser vants? A. I have always considered him a very kind, humane master; I have not known anything to the contrary, with the single exception of his shooting that boy. ' Crq~s- examination by Judge Holt.— ft. You say you wou d not believe Mr. Thomas under oath; have yon ever hc^rd him charged with having sworn falsely on any occaslon? A, I do not kuow a^s I have. ft. lie is rather a talking, noisy'man in the neighbor hood, is he? A. Yes. ( ft. He talks a great deal about' tbe Union, and'a great deal against the Rebellion-, don t he? A. I- be lieve he does. ft. He has a reputation of being intensely loyal to the Government, lias he? A. I think he has; I believe he is con~ dercd loyal Q., Have you been loyal during tho Rebellion? A. I do Pot know that I have been guilty of any act against the Government. . ft. I speak of your sentiments: bave you during this Rebell. on desired the Government to succeed in putting it down?, A. I never wanted two Governments. Q. The question is a direct and piain one. I desire you to answer ? A. I can pnly .answer tbat by saying I never wanted this Government broken up; I would fatfierbaveseen one Government. Q. Will you please answer the question directly; yes or no ? A. I bardlv understand yotir questidn: I think I have desired the Government to succeed. . ft. You say you have committed no overt act of dis- loyalty?^ A. Not that I am aware of. ft. Have you ever spoken kindly or'the Government and encouragingly to your loyal neighbors and friends? A., I certainly have; I have endeavored to dissuade young men from going into theSouthern army. ft. Were you or not the member of a local brgahiza- tipn the object of whjch was to s.and by the State of Maryland in the event of her taking ground against the Government of theU'nited States A. I belonged to a military organization. ft. You state that you were at Dr. Mudd's in 18G1; did you not suppose at that time that this organization of which you were a member was'regarded as disloyal to the Government? A. I hardly know how to answer thequestion; circumbtances have changed so since then; at that time everything wa3 confusion and ex citement, and lean hardly answer thequestion. Q. Have, you , any knowledge of the existence of a treasonable organization ih this country known as •'the Knigfits pi the Golden Circle" or "Sons of Li berty?" A. I have not except what I have seen in tbe papers. ft. At.the time when you were a member of this or ganization, in the summer or fall of 1861, was not the Subject of tbe Legislature of Maryland passing an ordi nance ot secession discussed among you? A. Not to my knowledge; I may have heard such a thing spoken Of, but I do hot know that it was discussed to any ex tent. ft. Can ypu mention the names of any persons who have been most decided in expressing the opinipn you have stated in regard to Mr. Thomas' character for truth? A. Itbas been tbe talk of almost every man in tbat whole country. Q. Have you ever heard of a man of known loyalty (an ardent supporter of tbe Government) speak of Mr ' Thomas as a man not to be believed under oath? A. I d'd not know a'sl have. fBy the Court.— Q. Did not you rejoice at tbe success Ofthe Rebels in the first battle of Bull Run? A. I do not know as I did particularly. Q. Did you generally? A. I do not know as I did. ft. On which side were, your sympathies at that time? A. I suppose with the Rebels at that time: I judge so; I do not know. Q. When Richmond was taken on which side were your sympathies? A. With the United states Govern ment; Iwanted them to take Richmond and tbe war to stop. ft. What timedid your sj'mpathies undergo a change and what produced that change? A. I do not know; the only thing I objected to was tbe emancipation or the slaves; tJhat I tti ought was wrong. By Judge Burnett.— ft. How about the draft? A. I joined acluo. ft. To save yourself from being drafted? A. Yes, Q, What d-d you say about the draft being enforced? A. Not a word that I know of. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Was the understanding of which you have spoken as to the character of the witness, Thomas, for truth in his neighborhood during the war or be. ore? A. I spoke of him from his reputation for years back: five or six years, probably. Q. Was what you have heard based on an estimate o t his veracity chiefly before or since the war? A, I do not know: he has not borne a very good reputation since hewas a boy. I have heard him spokenofasa man who would talk a great deal and teli stories. . By Mr. Stone.— ft. What is your business in Balti more? A. I am doing a commission business, selling tobacco, r. Wm. T. Bowman. By Mr. Stone.— ft. Where do you reside?* A. Bryan town, Charles county. ft. Did you know J. Wilkes Booth? A. I did: Ifirst saw him, I believe, at church, in Bryantown: I was told that his r.ame was Booth, and a few days afterwards I saw himagaiu at Bryantown. ft. Do you know what was ostensibly his visit to that part of the country? A. Whan I saw him again at Bryantown he asked me iff knew any person whobad land to sell; I told him I had some I would dispose .of: be asked where it was, and I pointed out the place; he then asked me about the. price, and I told him there were two tracts, one of 180 acres, another belonging to tho estate, aud told himthe price: he then asked me if 1 had any horses to sell; I said I had several horses for sale, he said ho would come down and look at thenl. Q. Didyou know of Dr. Mudd's land bung for sale before you earned' nvn there? A. I beard him say last summer that he could notgethands to work his larm, and that he believed he would sell and go into the mer- ¦ can' tie business at Benedict, aplace east of Bryantown, on the Pawtuxent River. I'. D» you know whether prior to thattimeDr. Mudd wa . ilia treaty with any other one about tbe sale of his land? A. 1 think he was. ft. Do you know whether Booth inquired of any one else about land in that neighborhood? A. I do not. ft. What n the distance from Bryantown to the Pawtuxent River at tbe nearest point? A. About ten. miles. ' ft. What is the distance from Bryantown to the nearest point oh tho Potomac? A. I think Matthias Point is the nearest crossing, about five mifes distant. Q. How far doe3 Dr. Mudd live from the Pawtuxent line? A. About eightorninemiles. Testimony - of George Booles (Colored.) ft. Where do you live? A. With Dr. Samuel Mudd. Q. At which of his places? jA. At the place near Bryantown. ft. How far is that place from John McPhe- son's? A. About half a mile. ft. State whether you saw tbe doctor on Easter Sa turday evening. A. Yessir. Q. Where? A. Just below my house, coming from. Bryantown. ft Does the main road from Bryantown tor the swamp lead by your house? A. Ye^ sir. ft. Togo to Bryantown from Mudd's you can either go up the swamp or by your place? A. You can go thepfantationpath or the road,, either one. ft. Did Dr. Mudd, coming from » Bryantown, pass through your place? A. Yes sir. Q, Was there any one witb him? A. No sir; no one. ,; ft. Are there any woods between you and McPher- sons? A., Only a few bushes and briars inthe swamp. Q. Where had, yon been that evening? A. On the swamp, withmy hogs;- as I came, I met Dr. Mudd coming from Bryantown; he kept on witb his business and I kept on with mine; It was between three and four o'clock. Q. Did yoP see no one pass up either road? A. No sir-i ft. Is there any road that turns out between your houseand-McPherson's? A. No, only the path that goes to McPherson's house. ft. Did you see anybody on horseback or standing there? A. No sir. Q. Did you go near enough to see them if there had been anyone? A. Yes, I should have seen them as I passed.across the main road. Q. Did you pass quite near the little swamp? A. Yes sir. ft. How was the Doctor riding? A. At his usual gait. im TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON: iQ. Was that Dr. Mudd's usual route when he went to Bryantown? A. Yes; he always, passed through tbat way/. .ft. You are attending to that place for old Dr. Mudd, sire .yod not? A. Yessir. , . ft. Did Dr. Mudd stop? A. Yes sir; and he spoke to me; he asked me where I had, been, and I told nim. Cross-examination.— Q. You told him you had been in. the swamp? A. Yessir. Q. Did he ask you if you had seen anybody there? A. No sir. ft. How far was he from Bryantown? A. About one mile. ft. What sort of ahorse was he riding? A. The bay Alley. Q. Is it his horse? A. Yessir. Q. Had you seen it before? A. Yes sir; I knew it well. ft. This was oh the byroad? A. Vessir. Q. Did hesay anything about Bryantown at all? A. Not one word sir. ft. You could not see all over tbe swamp? A. Nosir. Q. A man might bave been there off his horse and you not see him at all. A. Yes sir. Testimony of Mary Jane Senames. .Q. Where did you reside last year? A. With Dr. Samuel Mudd. ft. Did you reside there the whole year? A. Yes, except when I went visiting at my sister's; I never stayed over two or three weeks at a time. , -CJ; Do you. know Captain B. Gwynn? A. I have a slight acquaintance with bim. ft. Do you know him when you see him ? A. Yes sir. Q. Do you know Andrew Gwynu and Geo. Gywnn? A. Yessir. Q. Do you know John Surratt ? A. Yes sir; I have sfeen him once. Q. Were anyof the parties whom I have mentioned at Dr. Mudd's last year ? A. I never saw them. Q. None of them? A. Not one. Q. Do jrou know of anyone staying In the woods and being fled from the house? A. There never was any one there that I ever ruard of. ;ft. What time of yearwasltthatyou paid these visits to your sister? A. In March last; March twelve months I staid three or lour weeks; ft. You were at Dr. Mudd's during the spring season and mil? A. Yessir. Testimony of A. 8. Howell. Q. Of what State are you a resident? A. Of Virginia; I was formerly of Maryland. , ft. Are you acquainted witb Mrs, Surratt? A. Yes Sir. Q. When did you first make her acquaintance? A. About a year and ahalr'agosir. ft. State to the Court if you were present with Mrs. Surratt and her father at Surrattsville? A. No sir. ft. Did she,- at any time that evening, hand you a newspaper to read for her? A. Yes sir, I think she did. ^-^ . . Q. Did you learn the fact at that time that she could not read by candle light? A, No s r, I think not. , ,Q. But she didhapd you tbe paper to read for her? A. Yessir. " ft. Have you been to her house in this city? A. Yes sir. Q. At what date? A. On the 20th of February. . ft. Wbat time did you go there; was it in the day or evening? A. After dark; possibly about eight o'clock. ft. Was the gas htiin the ball? A. Yes sir. Q. Was Mrs. Surratt able to recognize you then? A Not till I made myself known to her. Q. How many times did you speak to ber before she recognized you? A; I don't remember exactly. Q. Did ycu tell her who you were? A. Yes sir. ft, Are you acquainted wtcb Lewis Weichman? A. Yes sir. Q. How long did you remain at Mrs. Surratt's? A. I was there two days. ft. What was your object in going there? A. On a visit rs much as anything else, I had no business there in particular. 'ft. What was ydur reason for not going to a hotel? A. I knew them, and thought I would spend the time better there than at a hotel. ft. Were you short of money at that time? A. Yes sir. Q. Had you sufficient means to pay your expenses at ahotel? A. Idou't tbinklhad.sir. Q. Alter you made the acquaintance of Mr. Welch- mai did you show him any cipher? A. I showed bim how to make one. then he made it himself. Q. Wasitsimpleorcomplicated? A. I could tell the cipher If I saw it. ¦ Assi tant J udge Advocate Bingham then said-^Sbow hjm the cipher on the record. It is number three or four. Q. Was it like that or similar to ic? A. It was like this but this is not the one; I think; ' ft. Did Weichman give youany information with re gard lo the prisoners we at that time had on hand? Objectedto and tin; question waived. ft. Did youhaveany communication with Mr. Welch- man witb regard to hi3 gain? South? A. Yes sir. I had. Q. State wbat it was and what he said? A Hesaid he would like to go South. Q. What reason did he giye for wishing to go South? A. He d ri net give any particular reason. ft. Did he say anyrh.ngih connection with his going South about b s sympathies? Objected 10 and thequestion was withdrawn. ft. Didyou have any convcrs ition wi'h Weichman with regard lo getting hira ap'aceiri Richmond? A; He asked if I thought be could get a place there as; clerk;, I told him it was doubt. ul, because the wounded soldiers had the preference there, by order of the War Department. ft.' State whether he stated to you what his sympa-t thieswere. (Objected to, but tbe objection wai with drawn). A. We were talumar matters over, andjie. said that he intended to go South,, apd w„nteJipgo with.me, and I said if that was the case beh. d bPlter go then, as I didn't know when Isbouldcr sstheriver again; hegaid,be was not ready to go just then: he told' me his sympathies were with the fc. utu;and that the South, bethought, would ultimately e ucce:d. ft. Did he say that he had done allhe could do for tbe Southern Government? A. Ib^ieve he did. ft. Did he say he wa3 always a friend to the South? A. Hedid, , Assistant Judge Advocate Bipgbam stated that he objected to all tiiis. He might be overruled, but i.j this Court or outride of it he' would object to any such pro ceedings, andstated that in his opinion it was a mere' burl esq tie o n j ustice. The Commission sustained the opinion of the Assist ant Judge Advocate. ft. While at Mrs. Surratt's did you learn oPanvtrea- sonableplotorenteprisein existence? A. Ididnotsir. ft. Diu Surratt ever g,ve a despatch, verbal or writ ten, to take to Richmond? A. Nosir. ft. Did Weichman give youafull retui-n of thenum-' ber oi prisoner-? A. Yessir: he stated tj, me the num ber that the United States Government had. and tne number they had over what the Con/ederate Govern ment had: I doubled it,, but be said he had the books in bis own office fo look at. ' Cross-exauiinaiion.— ft. Where do you reside? >A. In King, George's county, Virginia- ft. How long have you resided there? A. About two years off and on. Q. Where d.d you reside in Maryland? A. Be 'ore the war In Prince George's county. Q. Does your family reside here ? ,A. Yes sir. Q. Wheadidyou first make the acquaintance of Mrs. Surratt, and her family? A. A year and a half ago. Q. Where ? A. Down-in the country, at their hotel. Q. Was she living-there then ? A. Yes sir. Q. You know John Surratt ? A. Yes sir. ft. Did he accompany you to Richmond ? A. Never sir. Q. Wbat has been your occupation for tbe last year and a half? (This question, was o jjected to, and the objection was overruled). A. I have had no particular occupation since I've been out ofthe army. Q. what army? A. Ihe confederate army. . Q. What portion of thearmy did ycu serve in? A. In the F.rst Maryland Artillery till July, 1SG2; I then left tbe service. Q. Were you mustered out ? A. I was discharged on account of disability. Q. What have you beendoingsincethat? A. I have not been employed in any particular business. , ft. Wbat have you been d 'ing? A. Nothing.' ft. Haven't you been making trips to Richmond? A, I've been there sir. Q. How frequently ? A. Some time once in two or three months; I've been there twice since the first of Appil, twelve months a^o. Q. And those two times were when? A. In Decem ber last and in February. ft. Did you go alone in December? A. There might havebjensomegeutlemen with me, Q. Wheredid you cross the line ofthe blockade?' A' In Westmoreland county. ft. Well, J u February, who accompanied, you? A- Half a dozen persons. ft, Who were they? A. Persons from the neighbor hood. Q. Any from Washington? A. No. sir. ft. Wnat was your business there in December? A. No more than to see my friends, and buy some drafts, ft. Did you buy any drafts? A. I think I did. ft. Diaftson whom? [The witness here objected to answer tbat question,, on the ground thathedid nhtwisiuo criminate others I ft. Were tbey persons iu Washington? A. No, sir. ft. Who were they drawn on? AJ On some of my friends in Maryland, ft. Wbat part of Maryland? A. In Prince George's county. Q. Were any of those, drafts drawP on apy of the ac* cused? A. No, sir, r Q. That was in December? A. Yes sir. ft. What was yonr business therein February? A To see my friends. tft. Did you carry any despatch? A. No; neverlnmy, ft. Did you, take any notes, or bring any back?' A; Q. Did you bring back any drafts? A. Yes sir. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 103 ft. From whom? A. From friends of mine in the army. ft. How far did you carry despatches? A. I never eatried any. Q, You are acquainted with the Surratts? A. Yes sir. Q. How often have you visited them; bow often did you go to Richmond after you became acquainted with them? A. About half a dozen times. ft. You say Weichman asked you to get bim a place in Richmond? A. He didn't ask me to get him a place, be asked me if I thought that he could get a place. ft. How did you come to talk about things In Rich mond? A". I suppose he understood I was there from my conversation. ¦ft Where was this? A . In his room. ft; At Mrs-Snr'-att's? A. Yes sir. ft. Was there any other person present? A. No sir. ft. Did you ever talk with Surratt about being at Richmond? A. I might. , Q. Did you Or did you not? A. I disremember; I Can't say positively. ft. Weichman knew you had been there? A. Yes sir. ft. I would ask you whetber this has not been your business lor the last year and ahalf? A. Nosir. Q. Have you any other occupation; doyou do any thing else for a support? A. Why, I've beep speculat ing a little in Virginia. - ft. Where? A. In King Georges county. ft. Were you not known by your friends as a block ade runner? A. I don't know. Q. What name did you go by besides the name you have given here? A. They sometimes called me Speflcer. i Q. Well, is that your name? A. My name is A; S. Howell. ft. What is tbe S. for? A. Spencer. ft. Whydid you not give it when asked foritunder oath? A. Weil, I wasn't particular; I thought A. S. Howell was enough. ft. Is Spencer your name? A. It is one of my names; some of my friends call me Spencer. ft, Was it given you in your infancy? A. I don't know. . Q. Give to the Court your rail name. A. A. gg Howell. . ft. Is that your full name, or only the initials of your name? Wnat is your nameinfuil? A. I seldom use "S" in my name; my Droper name is A. S. Howell. ft. When running the blockade, what name did you go by? A; By the name of Howell. Q, When were you arrested? A. In March. ft, HoW recently had you then come from. Rich mond? A. I had not been in Richmond for three weeks Q. That was in March? A. Yes sir. Q. Do you remember the time in March? A. I think it was about the 20th or 21st. ' Q. When you went to Richmond, in February, do you remember who accompanied you? A. I remem ber one man by the name or' Howe. Q. t>id any person lrom this city accompany you? A. No sir. Q. Any from Maryland? A. No sir; they were all from Virginia. ft. This cipner, where did yon get it? A. I've been acquainted with it some seven years. ft. Where did you learn it ? A. In a magician's book. ft. What did you u>se it for? A. I bad no use for it. ft. What did you carry it for? A. I did not carry it; I cotfld roakeit in twenty minutes. ft. Didyou ever teach it to John Surratt? A. Nosir. ft.. Did you ever meet, at Surratt's house, Mrs. Sla der? A. I never met her at Surratt's house; I met her here in Washington. Q. When? A. In February. Q. About what date? A. Tbe 20th or 22d. (J. Did you have any conversation with her ? A. Yes sir. _ - ft. Did she accompany you to Bichmond? A. Partly. ft. Did she ever come bach; with you? A. I met her accidentally in Westmoreland county. ft. Do you know the object of her visit to tbe Conte- dei-acy? A. No sir; I saw her first in Westmoreland county, Va. ft. When was that? A. In February last. ft, Did vou meet her at Surratts house? A. Not till Sftei 'I had metwith her ou tbe Potomac. Q. Wnen did you see her 6n the Potomac? A. About the first of February. . „ . ft; Did you come here together? A. Nosir. ft, Where did she go to? A. New York city. ft. Did you accompany her any distance? A. omy across the river. ^ , . „ . ft. You met her again at Mrs. Surratt's house ? A. ft. Did she eo in? A. Nosir; she stayed in the buggy. H. Who was with her? A. A young man. Who was he' A. John Surratt. ft; Did she afterwards come to the house? A. No ft. jHowlong did youstay at Surratt's? A. Two days ° a DidTo^havew conversation about your Eich- mond trip? A. Not particularly as I know of ; I had a talk with Weichman, and told them I had been to Richmond, but they already bad heard it. ft. They knew you had beep in Richmond? A. Tbey knew I was from Richmond sometime previous. Q. Did you have any conversation with Mrs. Surratt about the matter? A. I don't know sir. Q. Did yon meet Mrs. Slader in Richmond? A. Yes sir. Q. When? A. Last February. ft. After which she was with John H. Surratt? A. Yes sir. ft She went directly with Surratt? A. I don't know sir. Q. You don't know whether she was with him on the 23d of March? A. IS o sir. Q. Do 3rou know what her business was in Rich mond? A. No sir; I didn't inquire. Q. You only know that soon after you saw her at Mrs. Surratt's, you saw her at Richmond? A. . ft. What otuer of your friends did you meet at Mrs. Surratt's? A. I don't know that I metany. Q. Didyou meet Atzeroth there? A, I think Atzeroth was there. ft. Do you know whom he came to see? A. I do not sir. Q. Did you see this man Wood or Payne there? A. Nosir. Q. How many of the prisoners have you seen there? A. ,1 think I have seen two. ft. What two? A. Atzeroth andDr. Mudd. Q, Where did yon see Dr. Mudd? A. AtBryantown. ft. Tell us where your acquaintam e first commenced with Dr. Mudd? A. I have known him a long while, but I have not lately seen him, ft. Did you bring any drafts on him? A. No sir. Q. Or messages to him? A, No sir. Q. Were you ever at his house? A. Yessir. Q. When? A. Over a year age. ft. When coming from or going to Richmond? A, I was not coming from Richmond, and bad not been there. Q. How soon after did you go? I don't know. ft. How long did you stay with Dr. Mudd? A. Only an hour or two. ft. Did you take dinner with him? A. No sir. Q. Now who was it that drew these drafts, and upon whom were they drawn, and what was their- amount? A. I bought one from Mrs. Mary feurratt on her brother. Q. To what amount? A. Two hundred dollars. Q. Who else? A. I bought one from a young man. Q. On whom? A. On his mother. Q. Of bow much? A. Twenty-five dollars. ft. State what drafts you received that you collected? A.! None of any amount, except-one on a man named Janner, which I got money on tp pay those parties for the drafts. ft. Do you recollect what you paid for the two hun dred dollar draits? A. I thick' I paid eight hundred dollars in Coniederate money for one hundred. ft. What drafts did you bring to this city? A. I never brought any. Q. What drafts did you bring to Baltimore? A. None sir. ft. What drafts to St. Charles county? A. I never brought any. ¦ ft. Have you any of those drafts here? A. I have none with me. Q. What did you do with them? A. I left them down in the country. Q. Where? A, At my sister's. Q. What is her name? A. Mrs. Langley. ft. And she has all with her tbat are uncollected? A. I think so. „ „ , L ,_ Q. Have you ever taken tbe oath of allegiance to the United States Government? A. No sir, I never have. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. I wish to ask you whether you ever si w Dr. Mudd about Bryantown? A. Yes sir, I have been about Bryantown a good deal before the war; was raised in the county. ft. Yuu have seen Mudd there, before tbe war? A. Ob, yes sir. Q. Were you ever at Mudd's house at any other time since the war? A. I don't think I have been sir. By Colonel Burnett.— Q. You .say this conversation took place up stairs^ between you and Weichman, and in his room? A. Yessir, a portion of it. ft. Was any other person present? A. I don't think therewas. ,., Q. How come you to remember tbat conversation and not .be able to remember tpe conversation with Mrs. Surratt, or anybody else in the house? A. Well sir. itijustcameto my mind by thequestion being so pointed. ,, A ft. Did vou know tbat -be belonged to any company for the defense of Washington, and that he baa a quarrel with one ofthe family on account of his Union sentiments? A. ineverheardaword about it.sir. ft You didn't knowthat one of the ladies struck him in the quarrel, because he wore blue so'diers' pants? A. No sir, I never saw him wear blue soldiers' pants; Q Don't you know that he was turning you over to nick out of you about your visits to Richmond? Don't vou know be tried'to ftndout what your objects were? A If he did he didn't succeed (Daughter). 104 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ft. I rather thiPIc be did; didn't you, -know, he be longed to a. military company here lor the defense oi Washington? A. Nosir. By Mr. Aiken.— ft. Did Weichman. in that conversa tion, or not, state that he bad done all he couid ior the Sodth? A. Yessir; but I can't recollect the exact words. i ¦ The Court here adjourned to ten o'clock on Monday morning. Washington, May 29.— After the reading of the previous day's record Mr. Clampitt, on behalf of tbe counsel .for Mrs. Surratt, read a paper as follows:— Mary E. Surratt, one of the accused, in asking, for he recall of Henry "Von Steinaker, a witness for the prosecution, through her counsel, that in regard to the said1 SteiPaker' she proposes to prove that, Shortly, after the breaking, out of the war, be was a member of General Blenker's Staff, serving in the capacity of a topographical engineer officer; that while under sentenceof death at or near Cumberland, for attempting to desert to the enemy, that on or about tho month of May, lSfis, he made a second attern.pt to deserr. wi!b better success, and entered tbe lines o? General TmbodeP's command, ofthe so-called Confederate States, in or ab jut the month ofljay, 1862, scattered between Winchester and Romn'ey,' Va., and that most of the time from tbat date till May, 1863, he 'was employed as a draughts man by Major-General J. K B.Stuart, ofthe so-ca led Confederate array: that in May. isss.the saidSteinaker voluntarily joined Company If, of the Second Vir ginia Infantry, as' a private, and drew pay, bounty, clothing a'ndthe usual allowances of a private soldier, and that lie. was detailed as an assistant to Captain Oscar Hericks, an. engineer officer' or the staff of Major-General Edward Johnson, of the PP-cnllecl Con federate States Army, and remained with him during the Pennsylvania campaign of that year. «n"d that in traveling over Swift Run Gap he had no company until he arrived near CnancellorsviUe. where he fell ' in" with Assistant Surgeon McQueen, d' the ' so-called Confederate States Army, and two other gentlemen in said service; that he never ranked m sard service as an engineer o'licer. or received tLie pay of one; that he was frequently in the guard-hou^e lor shooting or threatening to shoot nem'Pes charged with piloting United States troops near MirieRun, Va., and other serious charges: that he stole moneys Which were placed in his charge; that he store a horse from Lieutenant David M. Cockerill, of the Second Virginia Infantry, and was tried by court martial for the same and found ¦ guilty, and that so«m after tbe spring, campaign of 1864, he stole some clothing near the nor trip f Richmond, and escaped to Winchester, Virginia, representing himself as being in pharge of the dead body of Major Henry R.Douglas, Assistant Adjutant-General on General Johiison's staff, who. is now present be'bre this Court, alive and well; that he never saw J.Wilkes Booth, the actor, in Virginia, or at- the camp at any time of the Second Virginia Regiment of Infantry,' and that no such meeting of Confederate officers as he speaks of in his teStirrron'y ever took placfe, where the ptans for the as sassination of President Lincoln were discussed. By heir counsel. (Signed) REVERDY JOHNSON, FRED. A. ATKEN, ., . J. W. CHAM PITT. < ¦ Judge Advocate Holt said that he was not informed where the witness was, but he was perfectly- willing that be should be recalled if found. GenerafWallace inquired whether the Judge Advo cate had ever declined or refused to issue the proper summons for the reappearance ofthe witness? Judge Advocate Hoftsaidtbathehadnot, but on tbe contrary had signified his desire to secure his attend ance: . General Wallace said tbat he made the inquiry for tbe purpose, if the Judge Advocate had never refused to summon the witness: of objecting to putting such a paper as that upon tire record. Mr. Clampitt called attention to the fact that no al legation had, been, made tbat the prosecution had re fused locall the witness. General Hunter said that the decision ofthe- Court last week was that If the defense desired Von Steina ker recalled every effort should be made- to recall him. Mr. Aiken replied that the defense then stated that tbey did not wish him called as a witness for the de fense. When upon . the stand he Was not cross-ex amined, for the reason that the defense knew nothing about bim. e ^General Hunter inquired if anything was known of Von Steinaker's whereabouts. , Mr. Aiken said that all that was known ofhim was, he was brought here after his having been released from Fotrt Delaware, and he had now gone, no one knew where. * Judge Advocate Holt asked by whom tbe paper Just presented had been signed. Mr. Aiken sad it had beensigned by the eunnselfor Mr. Surratt and wou:d be supported by Major-General j'.d.va:J Jouusoii, formerly of the Confederate army, wao was present as a witness, and by members of his SLatf. • General Wallace.— I would like to know for which one of the prisoners that paper isconsiclered necessary. Mr. Aiken.— For Mrs. t urratt; and it has a bearing, in a degree upon all of them. . - , , General Wallace.— Will thegentleman pleasestate the connection of tbat paper with Mjs. Surratt's .case? Mr Aiken.— The connection, as we understand it. is simply this:— We wish to prove that Mr. Booth was not in -Virginia at the.time slated by Von Steinaker; that no such nieetingof .Conlederate officers, as heal? leges, to'jk place: that no plans for the assassination of President Lincoln were discussed. I think thelan- -guageused by tbe witness was ihat one of tbeoi/iceis told him/Lincoln must 'go up the.spout;" that so far as theywuje conc^rped, the officers in the camp of the Second Virginia Regiment w<-iv hot aware of any such plan; that they did ¦ pot see Mr. Booth in that camp, and tbat if any such plan to assassinate tbe President d.d c sat t(- Mrs. Surratt had no connection with it, and knew nothing about it. Judge Advocate Holt said, it is not necessary to recall the witness to prove that. Mr. Aiken.— We propose to call the witnesses here as to whether they would believe Von Steinaker on hia ou.!h. Judge Advocaie Holt said that he was willing to ao- quiescein the application, but he wished the Oonrtto consider whether a paper such as the one which bad been read, so stringently dematory in its character, shou if permitted, in my judgment, will bediscreditaoletothe Court. Mr. Clampitt.— May it please tbe Court, I do not de- sires:andjng', in a position tbat would be doing any thing that would reflect upon the counsel in the degree tbat;inaemberortbeCourt has spoken, but,I under- S' aud my position. May it please the Court, as one of the counsel oor Mrs. Surratt, we are here standing Within the portals of this constituted temple of 'jus tice, and here for tbe purpose of defending the very citadel of life, and we feel it to be our duty to use every exertion in our power, consistent witb iorms that obtain be.ore a court, to impeach and destroy the testimony of any witness whose testimony can pro perly be impeached, and we do it for the purpose, if possible, of shielding the accused. Itis. at thesame time our bounden ducy.-tmdan obligation tbat we owe to our client, that we should spread before the Court the character of the witness on the part ofthe prose cution, who has made this explanation. I hope it will be satisfactoryto the Court. Central Wallace.— It is not satisfactory to me for the reason that he has in no instance been denied the privilege which he has sought by tbat paper. General Howe.— Neither has ne shown any connec tion of the paper with the case of his client. Mr. Aiken.^The Judge Advocate .has stated that h? Von Steinaker could bereachlv found hehad no ob jection to his recall. There seems to be a misunder standing, however, in regard to our asking for tbat. We did pot propose to summon him as our own wit ness, but we have presented this paper in accordanca with a strictly legal form. General Wallace.— Yes, we understand that. A vote was then taken by the Commission upon tb« question of allowing the paper to be entered upon its records, and the result ofthe vote was announced to be that the paper should not be entered. The witness aboVe referred to by the defense not being present the Commission proceeded as follows:— Testimoeay of Mr. Davis. ft. Where do you reside? A. At Dr. Samuel Mudd's. ft. How long have you resided there? A. Since'the 9th of January last. ft. What has been your employment there? A. Working on the farm. Q. Have you been there constantly since you first went thereon the9th of January? A.- 1 bave; I was absent from tbe plantation only one night ! Q. Do you remember what night tbat was? A. No sir; I don't really know; it was in tbe month pf Janu- ft. State how often Dr. Mudd has been absent from home from tbe time you wont there up to bis arrest. and the circumstances attending bis absence? A. Hs has been away from home only three nights; the first &T&TOireJlt,t?i Mr-George Henry Gardner's party, taking his family with him, and returning the next morning; tbat was In January, on the 26th; the second time he came to Washington with Mr. litfwellyn Gard ner, with whom ho also returned; that was onthe'tod of March; I am enabled to recollect the day by tbe fact that while he was away the barn blew down: tbe third time he came to Washington. TRIAL OF TIIE ASSASSINS AT .WASHINGTON. 105 Q. Do yon know John H. Surratt or John Wilkes Booth? A. I do not. „ Q. State whether you were or, were not. ill while at Dr. Mudd's, and lor how lon-i? A. I was very ill ior better than tnree weeks. I was taken ill in February, ¦and my sickness lasted until March. , ft Stale whether Dr. Mudd attended you during your Bickne-s? A. He did. ft. State whether you did or did not see Di\Mudd every day during all the time you were at his house? A. I saw him every day during tho time I was there, exception tbe three occasions that he was away. Q.^taie whether during the time you were there, you ever heard the names of John H. Surratt, .John Wilkes Booth or David E. Harold mentioned in the family? A. I did not. ! ft. Were you at homeon tbeSaturday before Easter, the l-Hii of April.' A. 1 was. Q. Do you know anything of two men being there that day? A. J saw two horses there; I heard mat, two men were there. Q. Do you know at what time that evening they left? A. Between three and four o'clock. , Q. Were you out as usual working that day? A. I was. ft. Didyou see either of the men? A. I did not. ft. Where were you on the Friday a Tier the assassi nation of the President? A. I was on the larm, at work. . Q. State whether you went for Dr. Mudd? A. I did. Q. Where was he? A. lie was at his lather's. ft. What did you tellDr Mudd? Assistant Jud^e Advocate Bingham.— You need not state wpat you to d him. The question wa; waived. Q. Some soldiers were at the house and you went for him? A. Yessir. Q. He came home with you? A. Yes sir; he came as far as the barn, and then went on ahead of me, iiiid I went lo work. , Q. When you went after Dr. Mudd what did you tell him? A, I told him t.iere were some soldiers at the boute who wanted to see him. ft. Was there anj- thing said between you about a cart? A. No sir. ft. Did you ever hear Dr. Mudd, durrig the time you were with him, express any disloyal sentiments? A. I did not. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. On the day after the President's assassination did you take breakfast wita the lamily? A. Nosa', idid not take either break, as t or dinner with the family that day: I was out attending the horses. ft. Whatdid you understand- about certain parties having been in the house? A. Nothing mo*e man that two men were there: one with a broken ieg. Cross-examined -by Judge Bingham.— ft. How do you knowthatDr. Mudd wont to George Henry Gardner's? A, I saw him going there. ft. How Jar was it? A. Not over a quarter ofa mile. ft. Where wereyou? A. I was home at the time. Q. His horse's nead was that way? A. No sir; he walked. ft. That is all you know about that? A. Yes sir. ft. You say you did not see two men there on Satur day? A. Nosir, I did not. , ft. How do you know that tbey had left the bouse on Saturday? A. Because their hcrses were gone when I returned to the house at four o'clock in the aitcrnoon. , Q. How did you know tbat the men were gone? A. I thought so. ft. You did not know it? A. No sir. Test jssaoey of J ul a an n Blois (Colored). '". By Mr. Ewing— Q. State whether you formerly lived atthehpuseof Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. A. Idid. ,Q. When did you go there to live and how long did you stay? A. I went there on Christmas beiore last Christmas. ' ft. Did you ever know of any Confederate officers or soldiers being about Dr. Mudd's house? A. No Sir. . ' ft. Did you ever see Andrew Gwynn, Ben Gwynn or this man— exibiting to witness a portrait of Surratt— at that house? A. I did not. Q. Did you ever hear tbe names of Ben Gwynn, Andrew Gwynn or Surratt. mentioned in the house wtiile you were there? A. No sir. Q. State What sort of a master Dr. Samuel A. Mudd was. A. He treated me very well, as also all that were around him; he was Very kind to us all; Hived with him a year, and he never spoke a cross Word to me that I know of. ft. Did you ever know of his whipping Mary Simms? A. No sir, he never struck her thatl ]£new of. ft. Doyou know w.iat Mary1 Simms left the house for? A. On one Sunday evening .Mrs. Mudd told her not to go away, but*«he would, gp; the pext .morning She (Mrs. Mudd) struck her with alittle switch; Ido not think she hurt her, as the swltch'was.a small one. ' Q. Dr, Samuel Mudd never whipped her at all? A. No sir; I pever heard of him striking ber. Q. What is tbe general reputation of Mary Simms among tbe colored people around there? A. She is not a great' truth-teller sir, becauseshe has told lies on me. Q. Do you know what the colored folks arouncUhere icuerally think of her? A. Well, they generally think slioisnhar. ft. Do you know what the colored folks there think ol Mylew Simms as a truth-teller? A. Tbey thought thesame of him as oi;Mary;ir he got ansry with you he Would tell a he on you ior the sake of satisfaction. Q. Ihut was the general opinion about him? A. Yes sir. ft. Did you ever hoar Dr Samuel Mudd talk about tho government of Mr. Lincoln? A. t never did Q. You left there two days before last Christmas; do you know anything about Dr. Samuel Mudd going away on that da.\? A. Dr. Samuel Mudds wile told me he was going to Washington to buy a cooking siove. ft. Where have you lived since you left Dr. Samuel Muddy? A. \\ ith Mr. Wall, in Bryantown. The Commission then to>k areoess until two o'clock at which time the booy reassembled. Testimony of ©a\ Oeorg-e I>. Mudd. By Mr. Ewing.— ft. State your residence and busi ness. A. I am a practitioner ot mediciuein tbe village ol Bryantown, Charles county. Md. Q. State- whether you know the prisouer, Samuel A. Mudd, and what relation, if any, exists between you. A. I know him;his father aud my father were first cuusius; he was a studept under me some years ugo in the study ol'medicine. ft. State whether you know his reputation in the neighborhood in which ho lives .or peace, order and good citizenship. A. Ikpowof no oi.o whose reputa tion is better in that regard; it is very toed. ft. State what is his reputation as a master. A.I havo always considered him a humane man towards his fellow man. whether servant or otherwise; he al ways clothed and fed his servants well, and treated them kindly, sa iar a*. 1 knew. Q. Stale whether or not jousaw Dr. Mudd on the Sunday a!terthe assassination of the President. A. Yessir; I saw him at church; he overtook meafter that on my way homo to Bryantown, and I rode with him ;is lar as his house. ft. State whether hesaid anything to you about any pei> ons having been at ,h is house. Judge Advocate Holt objected to the question on the ground that the Government had not offered the de clarations ofthe prisoners in evidence. Mr. Ewing said tha> he- proposed to show by the witness, who was a man of unquestionable and active loyally, that the , prisoner had informed him that on Saturday morning there weietwo susuic'ous persons at his huusoand had desired the witness, if he thought it advisable, to notify the military authorities ofthe Jact of their being at his house, but notto tell it. at large about them lest tbe parties and their friends mi^ht assassinate him (the prisoner) for tho dis closure. This was a part of the very substance of those actions of the prisoner by which it was sought to implicate him, and was connected with acts of the preceding and subsequent days which tho prose- tion had shown. This statement was virtually an act, and was dope during the time of that alleged silence on his part, which had been urged as a means of impli cating him as an accessory be. ore and after the Jact in this murder. If the fact that be had been silent was to be uryed against him. was not the fact of his break ing that silence to be, introduced in his behalf? More over, tbe statement was made at a time when the pri soner could not have known that any suspicions were directed against him. In support of his position Mr. Ewing readfrom '"Russellon Crimes," vpl. ii. p.758,and other authorities. Judge Advocate Holt remarked that when partial declarations were given in evidence the accused hada rujhtto insist thattbe whole should be given. In the present instance the prosecution had not offered de clarations of the prisoner. The ground uj. on which it was sought to introduce them, was that they were part.pf the transaction, itself. But the transaction at the tune these declarations were made had been com pleted; it had closed the day be. ore; it consisted in the,' fact of tbe prisoner having concealed and enter tained these men and sent them on their way rejoic ing, and that transaction on which the prisoner was now arraigned by the Government was complete at 4 o'clock' on Saturday afternoon. It was now proposed to introduce, a declaration on the part of the prisouer made twenty-four hours afterwards— aitpr he had had time to review his conduct. It Was not competent to declare the motives by which bis previous acts were governed, because there was no means of reaching these motiv.es, or Of introducing any testimony in re gard to them. Mr. Ewing replied the transaction was not wholly closed. The charge here was one of concealment, not only of the persons of those men while they were in the house; but aconcealment of the fact tbat they had been' in thehouse. Of four witnesses who testified that they went to Dr. Mudd's house on Saturday, two stated that Dr. Mudd denied that the men had been at his house, and the accused now desired to show that ho did give Information to tbe Government on Sunday, through the witness on this stand, that the men were at his house, The objection of the Judge Advocate was sustained, and the question was not put. 106 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ' QV'State whether you communicated to the military authorities, in Bryantown, fhe fact of,auy suspicious persons having been at the house of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd on Saturday? A. Idid. ft, State to whnm you communicated? A. I com municated, I think, to, Lieutenant Dapa, who was the principal in command of the military there at that time. ft. When did you communicate it to bim? A. I think it was on Monday morning. ft. Whatstatementdidyoumaketohim? A. Istated to him that Dr. Mudd had informed me that two sus picious persons were a , hishous ; that tbey'came there a little before day-break on Saturday morning, and that one ol them had a broken leg which he bandaged; that they were laboring'under somedegreeof excitement: more so he thought than should have been caused by a broken leg; that these parties had said they came from Bryantown, and were inquiring the way to Parson Wilmer's; that whilst there one of them called ior a razor and shaved himself, thereby altering his appear ance: that he (Dr. Mudd) improvised acrutch or crutches for the man with the broken leg, and that they went the direction of Parson Wilmer's, I think; that is about the whole of what I told the Lieutenant. Q. 01 whom did you get tbis information? A. Of the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. ' Q.^.Vhat time on Monday did you make the commu nication? A. I think Monday morning. ft. By whose authority did you make the communi cation? A. The mentioning ot that matter to me. or any other matter bearing on the assassination, par ticularly such an assassination as the country and the world now mourn, was my warrant and authority from him and everybody else who knew me. Q. At the time he imparted this information to you, was anything said about communicating to the mili tary authorities? A. When 1 left him I told him I would mention the matter to the authorities and see what could be made of it; he told me be would be glad if I would, but if I could make such an arrangement he would much prefer that be should besentfor, and that he would give every information in his power re lative; that i." it became a matter of publicity he feared for his life, on account of guerrillas that might be in festing the neighborhood. Q. Did you say to what authorities you would men tion It? A. To the military authorities at Bryantown. Q. Did you make any other communication to any other mil.tary authorities of thefactstatedbyDr.Mudd? A. Yessir: Iwassont for, I tbink, on Tuesday after noon, by your detectives, who asked me to go up into a room with them, where tbey questioned me very particularly relative to this affair; I staled to them whdt I have already stated here, and upon my ina bility to answer such questions as they propounded, they ordered a carriage and asked me to direct tuem to Dr. Samuel Mudd'o bouse; I told them 1 -would do it. and that I would go with them; they seemed to pre fer that, add I did go with them. Q. State what happened when you went there. A. Dr, Mudd was not at the house: thedetective3 went in side while I remained at tbe door; I saw him coming artd told him as he entered the house that tbe detec tives had come there to ascertain the particulars rela tive to that matte*- ab'mt which he had spoken tome; tbat I had made tbe statement to the military authori ties which he had made to me on Sunday, and that they were making special inquiry in reference toit: I had already said to those gentlemen (the detectives) tbatl was confident that the Doctor would state t e matter just as I stated to them, and lelt the room and did not re-enter it during their examination of bim. Q. Name the officers that went with you, A. One was named Lloyd, another Galtighan. and the others were Lieutenant Lovett and a Mr. Williams. ft. State whether any inquiry was made by any of them, after the conference with Dr. Mudd, with refe rence to the route. A. Wuenwegotin thewagon.or, -I think, just be. ore getting in. thev asked toe if I Would Show them the way to Parson Wilmer's; Itwas then near nightfall, and I toJd them I would certainly do so If necessary: l then turned and asked Dr. Mudd; who was standing outside the door, wbat Was the besfroute to take tp Parson Wilmer's, and he gave me theinCor rnat.on; before we gotto the main road to Bryantown these gentlemen concluded, in consequence of my stating to them that another road was preferable, tb take'that other road. Q. State whetber or not anything was said by either of those gentlemen about Dr. Mudd having denied tbat the two men were at his bouse. Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham objected to the question, when itwas withdrawn. ft. State whether you were in Bryatntown on Satur day at the time of the reception ofthe news ot tne President's assassination. A. I was there when the news came, and remained all evenipg; I did not leave tbe village. ft. What did yop hear as to the person or persons Implicated In the assassination? A. Lieutenant Dana. on whom I called for inibrmatloh, told me that the party who attempted the asstiSslrtatiOrt of Secretary Seward Was named Boyle, and claimed bim to be the same who had previously assassinated Captain Wat the party wbd assassinated the President was1 sup posed to be a man by the nameof Booth, and that he thought tbe assassins had not yet got out of Wash- kins, of Anne Arundel county, Maryland, and that | is less 'cra& is he morVilkelf to . tSftheTuth? Ci. Was Boyle known in that region of eountry? A. Yessir; hehad been about UierP, but not for three ot lour weeks, or later thon two or three days alter the assassination of Captain W,atkins. Q. What was his character as known there; was' he known asa desperado and guerrilla? A. He was; his character was very bad. Q. State whether you were at church on Sunday, and what was known thereabout the assassination of the Pr sident. A. I was at church on Sunday; it was known that the President of the United States was as sassinated, and the matter was talked or. Ci. Was it, or was it not known that Booth had not crossed tbe river? A. No one. to my knowledge'; supposed that he had crossed the river at that time. Q. Didyou bave any conversation with Dr. Samuel A, Mudd at the church, or hear his conversation as to what he knew of the assassination? A. No sir; I he.irdhim Judge Bingham objected to allowing the witness to state what he had heard the prisoner sav. The objection was sustained and the question was not put. Q. At the time youspeak of having made a commu nication to the officers was anything said to them by you about Dr. Mudd having gone with one of the par ties alter a carriage, and it so state what? A. I told them so and that is a partlibrgot to mention, that Dr. Samuel Mudd did go to ascertain to see ir he could get a carriage to take them away from the house; that he went to his father's and down below there; tbat he wentwiththe younger Ofthe two men but failed to get a carriage and they lelt his house on horseback. Q. Didyou tell them anything as to how the man's leg was broken? A. yes, I think I told them that one boneofhis leg was, broken. Q. Did you tell them anything as to how it was said to have occurred? A. Yes, from the fall of a horse. Q. State the distance of the church at which you saw Dr. Sam. Mudd, the Sunday after the assassina tion, at Bryantown. A. I would suppose it to be about six and a half miles from Dr. Sam. Mudd's house. Q. Did you give them any description of the persons ot these two men, and if so, what? A. I do not think Igavetbem any. Q. State whether you are acquainted with D. J. Thomas, one ofthe witnesses ior the prosecution.- A. I know him. Q. Are you acquainted with tbe reputation in which he is held, where he is known, for veracity? A His reputation for veracity has always been very bad since i have known him. Q. How long has that been ? A. Since he was a boy Q Could youstate what his reputation lor veracity was be. ore tlie war? A. I do not think it was any bet ter than since the war. Q. From yourknowledge of his.charactertor veracity. wouldyoubehevehim underoath? A. If there were a monveto misstate lacts, I would not. Q. Do you know anything pro'e-sionally of his men tal ejndition? A. I have considered him an insane Q. State how and from what cause. A. I have seen tuna manliest such an abnormal condition of mind as torelievebmirromre,ponsibilityforncrime in ^Crimi nal Court; he is not always so insane; there seemed to lmve been a remittance .in his muni testations of in sanity sometimes; I have met liim when there was not much more disordered condition of mind than eccen- tr.city would imply; I would state that in approaching rft.§.Saalt,houeiTl.tJ belongs to no profession more than mine; I feel as.it I should be perplexed when the great master minds ofthe country, who have studieTand understand thoroughly all forms of medical and legal jurisprudence as 1 apprehend gentlemen of the Court 11 be- "?<> Particularly the Judge Advocate, are to be™y interrogators on »ne sSbject ot insanity. ofbis iArX'S nnni0r7erraoitv based UDOn tfle fact ot h s insanity alone? A. I cannut say that it is- 1 think it probable that his veracity is worse when n- sane-manHestations are prominent. Q. Is his ifeputation for veracity good during times when his mental condition appears to be best? A I never so estimatedlt. ra>' ¦*- x Cross-examined by Judge Bingham.— o Be eond enough to tell file Court what wurra you have rial on insanity . A. fhave read a great many works udo2 insanity and medical jurisprudence. 7 WOft re^d? ABTavinr's0I1»S?d^1 imprudence have you Sty. Tayaors' and o'hers on physiology and in> Q.'boanyof tljese works tell how crazy a man has :i06tb^owm^^vXUeTpe^yt#the "^ A * " ahmenUtai?ani'n5otori„ by the nam,e of Myers;. I understood at the time he was a sutler in Sigel's army; be said hehad found some goods.thatJ&e was to take tb Slew ber p.'Nbrth Carolina; my instructions were to make a. market for tbe goods, and I turned theni over to him; Dr. Blackburn told me at, the time that' he would have about $100,000 worth of goods got together that summer to be disponed of. ft. What aid be state to you was his object, if any, in disposing of tlmsegoods? , A. To destroy tbe army, arid anybody in the countiy* ft. Did he state that, these goods had been carefully iniected with fellow fever? A. Yes sh\ ft. Did he explain to ydutheprocess by which hie had infected them? A. He d.d not; he told me there were other parties engaged in it, be did not say who they were, who were about infecting other goods with small-pox, yellow fever, and so o,fi. " Q. Didyou'understand that the goods in this Valise, intended tobe sent as a present to President Lincoln, had also been carefully iniected withyellow fever? A. lunderstood himithad been infected With yellow fever and small-pox; I declined to take them. ft, Did you ever learn from bird whether he had ever sent that valise to the President? A. No, Idid not; I have beard it was sent to him. ft. What disposition Oi' this trunk and clothes didyou, make in Washington? A. I turned them over to V& L. Wall & Co., commission merchants; I requested an advance on them; they gave me' aP advance of $100, and I went hack to Canada. ft. Do ycu remember the date of that transaction? A. I think it was about the 12th of August, 1814; it w&s the largest ofthe five trunks: it had two watches in it, and was known as "big No. 2:"' my orders we're to be sure arid haye the trunk sold 'in Washington. Q. Didyou sendany of theothers, further South or were they all left here? A. I turned them. Over to the sutler, who put them in a Steamboat for Nor'blk; I ap plied to General Butler for a pass to go through myself, but the replywas that ihe army was about lomove, and tbat no persons -would be. bUlowed a pass not con nected with it. ft. State what opcurred on your return to Canada. A. I went through to Hamilton without slopping; there, I had to wait for the, cars, and was met bv Mr. Holcomb aud C C. Clay; they both shook hands w.th me, greeted me heartily, and congratulated me ou inysafe re,urnandon my making a' fonune; theytoidhiel should be a gentleman for the future;! telegraphed to Dr. Blackburn, who was then slaying' at Montreal, as Mr. Holcomb had told me, that I had returned; the next night between Hand 12 o'clock, Dr. B.&cuburn came up and knocked attire door; 'I was in bed, but looked out of the window and saw JDr. Blackburn; he told me to comedown and open the doOr; that I was like all other rascals after doing something wropg, afraid the devil was after me; hewas accompanied by sixtyyards' distance: I then told him that everything bad gone wrong in my business there since I had been away, and that I needed some money; be said he would go to Col. Thompson and make arrangements to dniw Oh him for any money I desired; he sad the British authorities had solicited bis attention to the yellow fever raging at Bermuda; that he was going on there. and, assoon as he cameback.be would seo me; I/Wen? to se:i Jacoh Thomp^ op the next.morning; he said that Dr.Blackburn had been there and made arrangements to pay me one hundred dollars when tbe goods bad been disposed of according to his directions: I told him I needed the money; he said:— "I will give you fifty dollars now. but it is against Dr. Blackburn's request; when, you show me that, you have sold the goods I will pay the balance; I gave him 'a receipt ior fifty dol lars on account of Dr. Blackburn; this was the 11th or 12th of August; the next day I wrote a letter to Mr. Wall, here, saying I had gone to Canada smpe he sold the goods, and asked him to remit to me the proceeds' at Toronto; when I got the letter of William L Wall I took it to Colonel Thompson; he said he was satis fied with it, and .gave me a check for fit tydollars on the Ontario Bank of Montreal; I gave hini a receipt for fifty dollars on accouut of S. P. Blackburn. ft. S,tate whether or not Jacob Thompson, in all vour connection with bim. Seemed to have a perfect know ledge of the character of tbe goods you were selling? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you mention to him tbe large sum that had been promised to yop by Dr. Blackburn? AT I did, and he said the Confederate Government had appropriated §200,000 for tbat purpose. , ft. How did he excuse himself ibr not giving you more ? A. When Dr. Blackburn returnee from Ber muda, I wrote to Montreal and told him I wanted money; he made no reply; I then sent down to R.H. Young: subsequently Imet Dr. Blackburn, who said I had written hwn very hard letters, abusing bim, apd that he ba'd not any money to give; he got into his car- TRIAL OF THE' ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 109 riage and drove off, and never gave me apy satisfac tion, or paid xne anything more. '-, ' ft. i tate under what name you passed when in Wash ington. A. J. M. Harris. ft. Where did ycu stop in this city? A* At;theNar tional Hotel, and I brought the goods there, ft Can you give the precise date? A. I think ix was the 5th of August, 1864. Q, In what name did you write tjhls letter to Dr. Blackbucn? A. In myown name. . Q. In what name did you write to Mrs. Hall? A. In tbe name of J. W. Harris, the same as I had registered myseit atthe hotel. , ft. Can you state whether C. O. Clay and Professor Ho comb, when you met on your returu, in their con: vernation with you, seemed always perfectly to under stand tl.e business you were engaged in? A. Yes; after I returned back to Canada I met Clay, Holcornb, Preston, Beverly Tucker, Dr. Blackburn, and several other gentlemen at the Cliiton House, Niagara Falls ft. Tuey then had a knowledge of your enterprise? A. Yessir. Q. And they complimented you upon your success? A. Holcomb and Clay did. ft. How do you know they had this knowledge? Was there a conversation between 'thera that leic no doubt on your mind as to the fact? A. In the conversation at ttie Clifton House I stated that J. intended to return that nightto Toronto; Dr. Blackburn had no money; he tolfl me that he would go to H tlcombej who had Confederate funds; he said that HolcOmbe was going tostay .there, and when he returned he would get money from bim Or Thompson for tbe expedition; tbathehadtO'get it from one of them; I understood from tbat time that they xnew all about it; I never spoke to them directly about it at all; I took it for granted, when they congratulated me on my sale re turn at Hamilton, they must have known all about it. Q. You speak of Stuart Robinson, a divine, of Louisville, Kentucky; who introduced you to Dr. B ackburn. Did he seem to have a knowledge of the business you were engaged in? A. Not 'from me; I don't Know whut knowledge be had from Dr. Blackburn. Hesaid hedid not know the nature of the business I was going on, and that he did not want to commit any overt act. All Iknow is that Dr. Robinson took good; care of me all. the time I was ¦there that time until Dr.Blackburn wrote for me. He did not give me any money. I borrowed $10 to come down to Montreal from Mr. Preston. I went down to Montreal and, saw Mr, Slaughter, who was to furnish ihe with funds to take me to Hali'ax. , Hesafd he was short of funds, that hehad, Inst several hundred dol lars by tho failure of a panic. He gave me %io and said I hid better go to Holcombe at the Donegana ISouse. I saw MrJHo'eombe and told him I was short of funds and wanted $40. He said I hv.d better take $50, but I replied saying I did np.t want it. The Judge Advocate asked the counsel for the de fense whether they desired to cross-examine the wit ness. Mr. Aiken replied that before the witness was dis charged he desired to know whether it was the purpose of the Judge Advocate to make use ofthe testimony in the summing up against any of the prisoners. • Judge Holt replied that it was. expected tbakrefer- ence would be made to all the testimony in, summing up, but that the object of this testimony was to connect the Rebellion witb this crimp. Testimony off Wm. X. WalB. By Judge HolU— Q. Are you a merchant in this, city? A. I am an auction and commission merchant. , Q, State whether, last summer, you received on con signment from a person representing himself as J. w. Harris, certain trunks aud goods? A. While I was out of town last August, my book-keeper received from a party named Harris, a lot pf shirts and coats, which he desired to be sold at auction the next morn ing; thebook-keeper said he wouldsell them; he asked for an advance on them, and #100, per trunk was the amount advanced, and the goods were sold the next morning; I did not see- them at all.. Testimony off A. Brenner. By Judge Holt.— ft. Werejyou employed last summer in the service of Mr. Wall, commission merchant in this city? A. Yes sir. ' - Q*- State whether in the month of August a man re presenting himself as J. W, Harris sent to tbe store of Mr. Wall certain packages of goods for sale.' A. A man calling himself Harris brought a package of goods to the store* for sale; I thought him a sutler returning home, and I advanced him rone hundred dollars upon them and sold them the next day: he said tuere were twelve dozen shirts, but there turned out to be more; I rendered an account of the sales to him at Toronto, C&nada, with the balance of his money, in accordance with a letter received from him directing it< which' L-bave here; it is dated at To ronto, September 1st. J864, and he states that he had written to me previously in respect to five trunks, containing one hundred and fifty woolen shirts and twentv-five coats, but had received no response, and asked me to send bim a check on New York for the proceeds. 1 Q. Do you remember aPvthing about tbe ! marks which were on these trunks? A. Nosir; I remember the shirts were thrown promiscuously into the trunks: I sorted them out into packages of a dozen and sold them. Qi Do you remember whether any trunk was marked No. 2? A. We marked them in selling them. , Bv the Court.— Did it seem to be new clothing? A. I thought when I first opened the trunk it was not, and bad doubts about its being a safe investment, but on looking further I saw it was new; it appeared to be crammed down into the trunk, ft. What amount d>d the shirts bring? A I pee by \ the account sales which' I have here that the whole amount was fMi'SKh Testimony of Tfeos. )L. Gardner. ' Q. State whether or not' you came np in company with Dr. Mudd to Washington last spring. A. Idid, sir. ft. State tlfe date of the visit. A The 23d day of March. I think, sir, ft. tstats what t me you left home to come up. A. On the2Ld, in the morning, after the usual breakfast time. Q. State tbe purpose of the visit.,, A. We came up to at Lend a sale of Government horses, which was to take place on Friday, butwe heardit was to take place on Tuesday, and so were disappointed. ft. Go on and state Where you and Dr. Mudd were during that visit. A, We;lelt our- horses at Martins,- walked across the street, came down the avenue, and went to a carriage taceory: we then went to a livery- stable, where he looked at some second-hand wagons, and thep went over on trie island to Mr. Clark's., and remained there till about dark, till the store was about to> close up; Dr. Mudd and myself walked around to Dr. Herring's, where we rem ii in fid some two or three hours, and then returned to Mr. Clark^ where we re mained all night; the next morning we T-opk leave of Clark., and went into tha Capitol to look at thes paint ings; we then went and took the street car, and went up to Martin's and.gotour horses, and after dinner we le;t ai.d returned home. , ., ft. S ate who slept with. Dr. Mudd. Ak Dr. Mudd and myse:f sfej.t together; there was but one bed inthe room., and we occupied that. Q. State whether you and Dr.. Mudd were separated. during the visit. A. No, sir: not(atall; lam confident that at no time were we out of one another's sight from ourleaving Martin's until we started back. , ft. Did ycu not see anything of Booth during that visit? A. No, sir. ft. Did you go into the National Hotel? A. No, sir; I think we -stopped talking in front of the Na'ional Hotel looking at some Rebel prisoners passing, but we did not go in., Q. Do you recollect tbe contest during the Congres sional election in your district in which Calvert was the-Union candidate and Harris was the Secession or opposing candidate? A. Yes sir, Harris rap as a Peace candidate. ft. Do you know which one Dr. Mudd supported? Objected to. ft. Doyou know on what ticket Calvert Was running? A. As an unconditidnal Union candidate. ft. Do you know which Dr. Mudd supported? Objected to. Cross-examined by Colonel Burnett.— Ql' Did you say that Mr. Calvert was running as'a better UrI on capdi- date than Mr. Harris at that election? A. Yes sir. Q. Was not Mr. Harland a candidate? A. I don't' know. Q. Were tbe o'her two peace candidates both of them? A. Fdon't know. Testimony off Sir. Bonn ing-. Q. State where you live. A. In Charles county, pear Mount Pleasant. Q. State whether you are acquainted with Dr. Samuel Mudd. A. I am very well acquainted with him. ft. Are you acquainted wich 'Mr. Thomas who testi fied here? A. Yessir, I was raised with both of themi . 'ft. State whether or not Dr. Muddand Mr. Thomas met at your house last spring. A. Yes sir, between the 1st andl5th they both met at my house. ¦> ¦ ft. D*d they meet at any other time this Spring at your house? A. No sir. , - ft. Did they come together? A. Nosir; Mr. Thomas came two or three hours before Dr. Mudd. Q. How long did Dr. Mudd stay there? A. About half an hour; I don't think he staid over half an houri Q. Were you present all the time Dr. MPdd was there? A. Yessir; I never left the room. > ft. State whether or not, in that conversational that time, Dr. Mudd sard that President Lincoln was an Abolitionist; that all the Cabinet were such, and that theSouth could not be subjugated by. Abolition doc-: trine, and that the President and Cabinet would all be* killed inrsJ3r or seven /weeks. A. There were nosuch words spoken in the house, to my knowledge; I stopped; there all the time; he came there to see me to collect a little doctor's hll. and. stopped thereabout half an hour;' as I walked out, Dr. Mudd rose and followed me out; I went directly home; Mr. Thomas stayed with me an hour afterwards. ft. could Dr. Mudd have bad any conversation with , Mr. Thomas without you hearing it? A. Nosir; even 110 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON if tbey had whispered I could have heard it, I, was so close tq both of them. , . ft. Was any partpf the statement I have recited. to you made by Dr. Mudd. on that occasion., A- Not to my knowledge. ft. Doyou think you would i have noticed it if it bad been? .A. I should certainly. ft. State whether or not, two or three weeks after that occasion, you met Mr.Thomas on tbe, road be tween your house and his, and whether he said to you tp&tatyour house Dr. Mudd had -said that the Presi dent and the' Cabinet and every TJniun man in the State of Maryland would be killed? A. He never said each a word; I never heardLa wordof that kind. ft. Neither before nor after the assassination? A. No sir. neither. Q. Oh i bat occasibn did Hr. Mudd say that be did Pot consider the oath of -allegiance worth a chew of tobaGco? A. Not that I recollect; there never was a word of it spoken. ft.. Wbat was the conversation about? A. Daniel Thomas was saying to Dr. Mudd that he was appointed asQeiective. and then referred to others; to Dyer and to Dr. George Mudd, and, perhaps, to one Hawkins; to being detective as well as he could, but didn't pre tend to catch anybody himself; it was bis duty, he said, togo to their houses, but he said he never would catch any body. Cross-examined.— Q. Were they talking, during the Whole half hour? A. Yes; they were detailing a lot of foolish things. ¦ft. What did Dr. Mudd say? A. I had no conversa tion with them. Q. What did Dr. Mudd say to Thomas? A. He said tbat he was a jack. ft. Wia* d d he call him a Jack for? A. Thomas said he was appointed a Deputy Provost Marshal, and Dr. MuddsaidjiT'Iam abetter educated man than you are, and lam not fit for that office," and then they talked, and Mudd called him a jack; I didn't like that, for I don't suffer jacks to come into my house. ¦ft. How long were you gone before Dr. Mudd went out? A. Not two S'-'conds. ' By Mr. Ewing.— ft. Did I upderstand you to say that you were hot out of the room during tbat interview? A, Yes, sir; I was sitting about one yard from them; it was cold weather; we h&d not wood enough on the tire, a*nd we all sat close to it. -Q. You heard all the conversation? A. Yes, sir; every word that was spoken. Testimony of H. I,. Mudd, Jr. Q. Where do you live? A. Near Bryantown. ft. How far from the accused? A. Three-quarters of a mite. Q. Didyou last winter or spring, in company with Dr. Mudd. come np to the neighborhood of Washing ton? A. Yes sir. ft. State where you both went? A. We left home oni the JOth. of April and stopped about twelve miles from Washington. We went.to Giesbpro' to buy horses and stayed there till 10 o'clock. We didn't find any horses that suited us as they were nearly all diseased. I made a proposition to go down to Martin's near the bridge and get some dinner, and we went apd took dinner there. . Q-Whitre^didyougo then? A. Directly home. . ft. State whether yop were separated from Dr. Mudd during tbat visit. A. Not during that visit; we were al l the I ime together. ' ft, State whetber you crossed the eastern branch. A, Nosir. " ft: DM you go on to Washington? A. No sir. Q. State whether you saw anything of John Wilkes Booth during tbat visit. A. Nosir, I did not. OU Doyou know anything aboutany other visits Dr. Mudd made to Washington? A. Yes sir, on tbe >23d or 24th day of December and on the 23d day of March he was there. ¦ft. Who came with him the first time? A. Jerry Dyer. 'ft. Who. came with him the second time? A. Mr. Gardner. Q State whether you know anythingj except of those two visits, from the 1st of January to the present time. A. I saw him three or four times a week, sometimes at church, and sometimes at home; I1 never saw him any where else. ft. How long have you been living within three-quar ters of a iaue of Mudd's place? A. All my life. 4& Didyou live there last year? A. No sir; I was at college, but I came home on tbe 23th day of June. . ift. Have you been here ever since? A. Yes sir; ever Since. Q. Do you know of any part of tbe Confederate Boldiers being about your brother's house sinoe tbe 29th day of July, 1864? A. I do not sbr. ' ft. Did you bear orsee John Surratt at your brother's laoqse? A. Never, sir. ft. State to the Court whether or not your father Is a land owner in tbe county. A. Yes sir. Q. How large? (Objected to by Assistant Jpdge Ad vocate Bingham.) ft. How large a farm is it that your father has?' At Between fburandfive hundred acres. By Colonel Burnett.— ft. Do you mean that he owns it? A. Father gave it to him; he never had any deed for it; he is simply there as a tenant; my father owns it. ' Q. Don't you know that Dr. Mudd does not own a foot of lartdofany kind? A. I do not, sir. By Mr, Ewing.— The Witness— I have always under stood that the^arm was set" apart forhlm by his 'father; it fs known as bis farm. Q. Do yop know ofyonr brother having sold arid/re ceived the proceeds of any ]and belonging to your rather? A. Yes sir; the land on Which Mr. Forey now lives he bought from my father; the house was burnt down and my brother sold the farm. ft. Who held the title? A. My father sir. Testimony off Mir. Hardy. I live in Charles county, two miles and a half above Bryantown: I dined at thehouse Df Di. Mudd's father one week after the assassination; a messenger came for him to go to bis own bouse apd I went with him; we met Lieutenant Dovett in Dr. Mudd's ya'rd; Dr. Mudd introduced LieutenantLovettto me, and he then walked into tbe house, and J>r. Mudd told Lieu tenant. Lovett that the boot was in tbe house, and asked hirn if he wanted it; I think he mentioned.it af ter we got intothe house; no iuquiry had .been made be ore in my hearing. Q. Was anything said about where it was found? A. Mrs. Mudd said she found it in, dusting the room under the bed. Cross examination.— I don't know what remark was made about searching the house. By Mr. Kwiue.— ft. Who gave the boot to thp officer? A Dr. Mudd himself. , ft. What time of day was it? A. Between 12 andl o'clock; we had dmnerat Dr. Mudd's father s; I didn't see the messenger; 1 think it was Mr. Davis' child ran in and said Mr. Davis was in tbe yard and wished to see Dr. Mudd. Testimony offI>r. Blandford. ft. Where do you live? A. In Prince George couPty, about twenty miles from the city. ft. State whether or not, during last/spring or winter, you accompanied Dr. Mudd towards Washington. A: I did, on the nth of April, .to Giesboro', to attend a sale of Government horses there. Q. 'State who was, in company 'with him. A. His brother;, we arrived at the sale before tbe hour, and I remained there with him tiU twe'.ve o'clock', examining horses; they' were of an inlerior quality, and he made no purchases during my stay there; at about, half-past twelve o'clock I le*t him ana made an engagement to meet him again; I went to Washington and got back to Martin's at aboufhalf-past two o'clock, and found Dr. Mudd there, ft, Wben you started (or Washington you left bis brother with I im at Giesboro'. A. Yes sir. ft. Did you find him there when you returned? A Yessir. Q. State where Martin's is. A. On the forks of the road, not more than one hundred yards from the bridge; onerond leads to tbe right, and the other is tbe stage road leading into the country. ft. That is onthe^ther side of the Eastern Branch? A. Yes sir. ft. Have you any knowledge of Dr. Mudd offering to sell his farm? A. T think he said he would like to sett Q. When didyou hear him speak of that? A. For several years back. Q. What place did he refer to?' A. The place that he lived in; I beard him speak of it in the last eighteen months several times. * ft. How lone did you stay at Giesboro' together? A, Till eight or nine o'clock. Testimony of Mr. Marian. I am acquainted wit-^ both Dr. Samuel ' Mudd and Henry L. Mudd, and also with Dr. Biandford;. Ifsaw them on the 23d of March, and, also. I think, ou the4iji ot April last; both Dr. Samuel and Henry L. Budd were at my house for one or two-hours; Dr. Blandiord joined them between three and four o'clock. ft. Was Dr. Mudd there afterwards, between that time and the assassination? A. No sir; neither w.,8 Henry L. Mudd nor Dr. Bland-ford. Testimony off Mr. Montgomery. ¦»/ SP\ acqu^ntod with the prisoner, Dr. Samuel Mudd; in las' December he made an arrangement with me tor bringmg a store to Washington; I reckon^ was on the 22dof that month, in the morning. The Court then adjourned till ten o'clock to-morrow morning. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ill Washington", May 30.— Visitors of both sexes continue to crowd the court room almost to sufibca- tion. At the trial Messrs. B. Hubbard, John E. Roberts and Charles E. Follows, of Col. Baker's ,D,eteotive Force, are in attendance, enforcing OTder and cour teously attending to their appropriate duties. The record of the previous day having been read, the prosecution proceeded to call three witnesses, the remaining being for the defense. Their testimony was as follows :— Testimony off Lewis F. Bates. By Judge Advocate Holt.— ft. State where you re side. A. In Charlotte, N. C. ft. How long have you resided there? A. Little over four years. ft. In what business have you been engaged there during tbe past year? A. I have been engagedasSu- perintendeutof the Southern Express Company for the Stat e-of North Carolina. Q. Staie whether or not you saw Jefferson Davis re cently at Charlotte, N. C, and under what circum stances. A. He stopped at my house, on the 19th of April last. ft., Did he make an address tc tbe people on that oc casion? A. Hedid, onthestepsof my house. ft. State whether or not, in tbe course of tbat ad dress, or towards the close of it, a telegram was re ceived by him announcing the assassination of the President of the United States. A. Itwas. ft. From whom? A. From John C. Breckinridge. Q. Did he or did he not read tbat telegram to the crowd? A. Hedid. ft. Look at this (exhibiting to witness a telegram), and see whether it is the same despatch? A. I should .say tbat it was. The despatch was then read, as follows:— Greensboro,, April 19. 1865.— His Excellency Presi dent Davis:— President Lincoln was assassinated in the theatre in Washington, on the night of the 14th Inst. Seward's house was entered on tbe same night and he was repeatedly stabbed, and is probably mortally wounded. /Signed) JOHN C. BRECKINRIDGE. ft. fetate what Jefferson Davis said after reading this despatch to the crowd. Endeavor to recollect bis pre cise language. A. Attbecohclusion of his speech to ithe people be read this despatch aloud and made this remark:— " If it were'to be done it were better that it were done well." , m^ ft. You are sure these are the words? A. These are vthe words. . . ft. State whether or not, m a day or two afterwards, Jefferson Davis, John C.Breckinridge and others, were present in your house at Charlotte? A. They were. ft. And the assassination of the President was the subject oi conversation? A. A day ortwo, afterwards that was the subject of their. conversation. ft. Can ycu remember what John C. Brecken ridge ¦said? A. in speaking ofthe assassination of President Lincoln he remarked to Davis tbat he regretted it wtfBrymuch: that it was unlortunatetor the people of the South at that time; Davis replied, " Well, General, flT don't know; if it were to be done at all, it were better it were well dene; and if the same were done to Andrew -Johnson, the beast, and to Secretary Stanton, .the job would then be complete." ft. You feel confident that you recollect the words ? A. These are the words used. ^.State whether or not tbe regret which John C. Breckenridge expressed at the assassination was be cause of its criminality, or simply because it was un- .fortunare for the people of the South at that time? A. I drew that conclusion. . , . 1 Q. Was there any remark made as to the criminality of tbe act? A. No sir: he simply remarked that he re- *gretted'it as being unfortunate for the South. ft. Of what State are you a native? A. Of Massa chusetts. Testimony off J. C. Courtney. " Q. Where Po you reside? A. At Charlotte, N. C. Q. In wbat business were you engaged there? A. In ¦-the telegraph business in connection with the Southern Express Company. * „..,..,,, ^ ft. Lookatthetelegraph despatch of which Mr. Bates -has just- spoken, and state whether or not it passed over tbe wires at the date indicated? A. Yes sir; that is a true copy. (A copy ofthe message telegraphed on the 19th of April last, to Jefferson Davis, was shown to '-Witness "\ Q. From what point? A. From Greensboro', signed :by John C.Breckinridge. ft. This despatch was sent from tbe office to Jefferson Davis at Charlotte? A, When tbe message was re ceived he was en route to Charlotte ; it was delivered to him at Mr. Bates' bouse, in Charlotte. Judge Advocate Holt then stated tbat inasmuch as '¦the counsel for the prisoner, Spangler, had not as yet opened the case for tbe defense, he desired to call an other witness for the prosecution in regard to that ^Ko objections being made, the following witness was called:— Testimony of Jaeott»,R3tters]>aeli. By Asssistant Judge Advocate Bingnam'.—Q. State w.hether you were a carpenter at Ford's theatre down the 14th of April last? A. I was. Q. Were you present on the night of the 14th when the President was shot? A. I' was. Q. Which \ox in the theatre did the President oc cupy that nigbt? A. It was on the left hand side of the stage, the right hand side as you come in from the front. Q. When the shot was fired did you hear anybody^ cry "Stop that man?'1 A. I did. ft. State where you were and what you did when you heard the cry "Stop that man?" A. 1 wasstandingon thestage, abouttbe centre, behind the scenes, when somebody cried out, "The President is shot!" Then I saw a man running across thestage towards the back door; bo bad a knife in his band; I ran to the last en trance, and as I came up to him he grabbed for me, and struck at me with his knife; I jumped back; he then ran out and slammed the door shut; then I went to open the door, and I thought it was kind of fast; I couid not get it open very readily; at that time some body cried out, '"Which way?'' and I answered "This way." Then I got out, but the man bad got on bis horse and gone down the alley; I then came in and met Spangler. Q. What Spangler? A. Edward Spangler, the pri soner, and be kind of slapped me on the mouth with bis- open hand, and said, "Don't say which way he wait;" I asked him what he meant by slapping me in the mouth, and he 8aid,"For God's sake, shut up!" that was all be said. Q. When you went out tbat door had anybody else besides themau with the knife gone out beiore you? A. I did not see anybody. Q. Did anybody go out after you? A.*Yes, but I do not know who itwas. Q. Did you leave the door open when you ran out? A. Yessir. ft. What was your business on the stage? A. MybusU ness was to shove the wings. Q. State what sort of a man, if any, went out after you. A. I thought he was a tall, pretty stout man. Q. Do you know him? A. No sir. I did not notice him particularly. Q. When you came back into tbe theatre was the Poor open or^shut? A. It was open. Cross-examined by Mr, Ewing.-Ki. State where you were standing when you heard the pistol firea. A. In the centre-of thestage. ft. Where was Spangler then? A. He wasabout In thesame place, justabout where we shoved off the scenes; he was standing there, and seemed to look.palei. ft. You are certain you both stood there when the pistol was fired? A. Yes sir. ft. Didyou know that the pistol hadbeenfired inv mediately after it happened? A. Not right away; Idid not know wlfat had happened until I heard somebody halloo ''-Stop that man; tbe President is shot." Q. When you came back whereabouts was Spangler? A. In the same place where I left him. Q. Was there a crowd there? A. Tbe actors were thereand some strangers; there were some women standingthere belonging to the theatre; I do not know their names? Q. Do you not know one of them? A. I do not know any of -their names, not having been acquainted with ¦them: I had been there only four weeks. Q. Did any one of them take any part in that play that night? A. Yes sir, some of them did. ft. What parts did they take? A. I do not know*' wbat parts,' but one they used to-call Jenaie. Q. How close was she to you when Spangler struck you? A. About threeorfour feet. Q. She heard Spangler state the words you have given? A. I do not know. Q. He said it loud enough for her to bear? A. Notso very loud. Q. Hesaid it in tbe usual tone? A. Yes sir, he looked scared and kind of crying. Q. Did you hear the people crying," burn .the the atre?" A. Nosir; Ijustheard them hallooing "hang .him, sboot him,"that-was all -I heard. ft. You mentioned what Spangler did and saidtoyofc to several persons since then? A. Yes sir; I do not know, I think I told some detectives that came there. ft. Did you tell efther of the Messrs. Ford? A. No sir; I told Gilford. m Q. What did y-euTellGifford that Spangler said? A. I told him Spangler said I should not say which way he ran. - ft. When did you tell Gilford? A. The same week. I think that I was released from Carrol prison, the week beiore last. ,,,,.. ft. Do you not know what they called-the detective whom you told? A. Nosir; he bad black whiskersand a very heavy moustache, and weighed about 140 ft Can you recollect anybody else to whom you told it? A. Imigbt havesaid something about itatthetablte in tbe house Where I boarded. Q, Did you see Booth open the door? A. Yes sir. Q. Did you see him shut it ? A. No sir. Q. How close to you was this big man who run out after you ? A. He might have been five or six yards 112 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. from me when I heard him or somebody else halloo out "which way;" I have not seen that man since. Q. How long was it before you. came back to where Spangler was standing ? A. It might have-been t\yo or three minutes. ft. And he was crying ? A. He looked so; he seemed scared. . , g ¦; , ft. Whatdid you say to bim before he fpoke to you as you hayestated? A.,I,didnotsay anytln'ng, Q. Were you at supper witb Spangler on the night before the assassination? A. Yes sir; we boarded to gether. Robert Martin, a witness for tbe defense, being palled, stated tbat be was mistaken in that portion of his testimony of yesterday referring to the visit of the . prisoner, Dr. Samuel; A. Mudd, to his bouse on the 4th of April. It was Jerret Mudd, not the prisoner, who visitedliim, and the datewas-iith instead of 4th of April: The whness further stated that the prisoner, in company with Jerrett Mudd, called on him while he was in market in Washington on tne24thof'December last, and that he saw tbe prisoner again,onthe2tfdof March, in company with Mr. Lewellyn, the(occasion of these gentlemen stopping over night at his house, and that he did not recollect seeing him on any other occasion. Jerry Dyer, a witness for the defense, being recalled, stated that he had never gone into Virginia. He in tended to say that hehad not crossed the Potomac since 1S61, but did get to Richmond, Virginia, at tbat time with the party who had been sleep/ngin the pines. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bjngham— Q. Who were the parties whom you accompanied to Richmond atthetimeofwhichyouspeak? . A, Ben. Gwynn and Andrew Gwynn.. , Q. That was after the Rebellion commenced? A. (Yea'sir.i . * Q. Did you see Jefferson Davis while you were in [Richmond? A. I did, but I never spoke to him in my life; I remained in Richmond Only about a wee!;, and didnotmeet with any ofthe officers of the Rebel or ganization there except Taylor, to whom I went, to get ft pass.ft. What business took you to Richmond? A. I went there to avoid arrest. Q. You preferred to fall into the hands of the enemy? A.j I regretted very much the necessity of going there, Q. To what pines do you refer in your testimony? A. To the pines about Dr. Mudd'shouse, , Q. Did you sleep in the pines at night? A. Yes sir. Q. Who led you? A. Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. Mr. Ewing objected to a further examination of this witness, as all these facta had already been stated by him in his examination in chief. General Hunter inquired whether tbe witness had not sworn that he was a loyal man and had been such -from the beginning ot the Rebellion? i Judge Bingham replied that be so understood. i ft. Did you not belong to an association-hostile to the Government of the United States? A. I belonged to a cavalry company. Q. Was it not the purpose of that organization to stand by tbe State of Maryland in any position she might take, loyal or disloyal? A. Tbat I do not know. . ft.. Did you not publicly proclaim yourself in favor of the secession of Maryland? A. Not tbat I am aware of; I may have done it. , . By Mr. Ewing.— ft. State whether when you went to Virginia you entered into the Confederate service. A. I.did not; I did not go lor that purpose. Q. State whetber when you returped you took the '¦•ttath of allegiance. A., I did. Q. State whether you have done any act to aid or en courage the Rebellion since taking the oath? A. I bave not, that I am aware of. , By Mr. Bingham.— ft., When did you take this oath ot allegiance? A. In 1861; I am not positive as to that; I know it was a short time after I returned. Q. Who administered the oath of allegiance? A. One of the lieutenants or captains; I think, down at General Hooker's camp. v Testimony of Marcelflus Gardner, By Mr. Ewing.^-ft. State whether you know the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. A. I do. ft.. State whether he has ever said anything to vou about offering his land ior sale, and, if so, when? A. I have beard him, on several occasions, during the past two years, state tbat he wanted to sell out. ..ft. Were you at the church Jnth% neighborhood on ihe Sunday alter the assassination? A. Yes sir. Q. Was the fact of the assassination of the President then known and talked about at the, church? A. Yes sir; I think it was genorally known. , Q. State whether the name of the assassin was gen erally known. A. I think not. ft. Did you see Dr. Mudd there? A. Yes sir. ft. State whether you heard Dr,.Mpdd say anything as to bow he regarded the assassination, Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham objected to the question . Mr. Ewing said tbat he had again brought this ques tion before the Court for the purpose of calling their attension specially to tbe character ot the declaration which he expected to prove, that Dr. Mudd spoke of' tbe assassination as an atrocious and revolting crime, and a terrible calamity to the country; and that he spoke of it generally among .his neighbors at, the church in that way. Tbeprisoner was charged with a concealment of the facttof those two men being at his house, which was a concealment extending over Sura- day-.>and his declarations showing his feelings with re ference to the crime during the time he was alleged to have been acting accessory to it were admissable. The objection ofthe Judge Advocate was sustained, and the question wasnotput. , , Mr. Ewing then stated that he bad no further exami nation ofthe witness to make. Testimony off Jos. N. Saylor. By Mr. Stone.— ft. Where doyou reside? A% Inthe Eighth Election District of Prince Georges county, Maryland. , ft. state whether you know tbegeneral reputation of Daniel G. Thomas for truth and veracity. A. I know his general reputation in that respect pretty well, both from report and observation; it is bad. '¦ ' ft. From his general character fortruth and veracity would you believe him on his oath? A. From my own knowledge'ofhim I would not. ft. Hbw, long have you known Thomas? A. Since he was a small boy. Q. Didyou know his general character for truth and veracity before this war? A. I have known him all the time; I never heard him spoken of well at any time; his reputation Is that heueVer tells the truth when a lie will answer his purpose. Cross-examined by Judge Holt.— ft.' Did you ever know of Mr. Thomas ¦ speaking falsely when under oath? A. I never knew him to be sworn. ft. Did you ever hear it charged upon him that he swore falsely? A. I do not know that! ever did. ft. The reputation of which you speak is, thathe talks idly, extravagantly arid unreliably, bu'tthat re putation does not extend to any statements which he would make while under oath. A.' I never heard that he had been charged with swearing false. y. ft. Is he not reported to be an honest and loyal man in his neighborhood? A. Well, he is sometimes one thing, and semetimes another, just as the prospects of either side vary. Q. Have you been loyal yourself since the Rebel lion? A. I bave. Q. Have you constantly desired that the Govern ment should succeed In suppressing the Rebellion? A. Always. J IP'reply to some further questions, the witness said tbat his ground for suspecting the loyalty of Mr. Thomas at particular times, were based upon wbat that person had told others; that personally be was very friendly with Mr. Thomas, their residences being near each other; that he had never had a ny private or political differences with tbatr gentleman, and that the reputation of Dr. George Mudd, as a loyal man and a supporter ofthe Government, was universal in that neighborhood. Testimony of Wni. A. Bffudd. By Mr. Stone.— ft. Do you know Dr. S. A. Mudd? A. Ido. ft. How far do you live from him? A. About a mile and a half, ft. State whetber at anytime last year you saw a Captain White, from Tennessee, or a Lieutenant Perry, at or about Dr. Samuel Mudd's premises. A. I never did. ft. Did you. see Andrew or Ben Gywnn or George " Gwynn about his premises at any time last year? A JSosir; I have not seen Andrew Gvvvnn since he left lor the South: Mr. George Gwynn I have seen at our church several times since he returned. Q. Did.yon see any person staying out in the woods, about Dr. Mudd's, during Ja;t year? A. I did not: I never saw a man there that 1 had heard of as having been South, except one; 1 recollect seeing Mr. Ben Gwynn at the Doctor's; Irodeupfand ascertained from him that he was scouting, or something of that kind; that has been quite three years ago; it may have been in thefirstyearcftbewar; itwas the time 1 understood they were after him. • Testimony of Francis S. Walsh. _ By Mr. Stone— ft. Where do you reside? A. I bave lived in this city since ix.;7. I ara a druggist Q. Do you know tbe prisoner Harold? A Yes I bave known bim ever since be was a boy I have known him intimately, siuceOctober, 1SR3 ft. Has he been in your employ. A. He was fornin* months, as acierk, ft. State as near as you can his character? A. He lived in my bouse; I knew nothing objectionable In bis character. He was like most young men light and trifling In.some things, but in his moral character I saw nothing to find lault with. Hewas temperate in hia habits and regular in bis hours. *»«»«« <« ft. State whether hewas or was not in his general character more ol a boy than a man? A. I think so. ft. State whether or not he was easily influenced or persuaded by any one around him? A. I should think he was: more easily than bo vs or young men of his aire- he was boyish in many respects. «««sw. By Judge Holt.-ft. What do you suppose to be hia age? A. About twenty-two years. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS, AT WASHINGTON. i Interior View of the Court Room Occupied by the Military Commission. g-s-g- ** O ® <= r- 2. 5 o 2 "p3 5 CO o t-1a Si fed ft !>?3N H WoHH S3O O ato 02 2 ©It1H P ^ P a S d > a > w t) to a o « o a PRISONERS DOCK lOQOR TABLE OF PRISONER? COUNSEL! I TABLE OF PRISONERS I COUNSEL -#' / ^POST 3> a3939PI PI OT 1 TABLE 1 1 1 TABLEOF MILITARY COMMISSION TNESs] STAND ^POST I JUDGE ADVOCATE VINDOw[ ]ddqr / SPOST WINDOW Boxes containing As sassins' implements. % X 3 — *- §N * THE PKISONERS' MAJVA-OiiES. The above is a correct drawing ofthe manacles used 1 hands, as in the old-fashioned shackle, where the In confining the arms of the prisoners. The wristlets J clasps are connected bycham links, thus effectually are attached tb an iron bar, about twelve inches in | preventing the culprit from unfesteamg or breaking length, which prevents the wearer from joining his | them. (8) TRIAL OF THE r ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON; 113 Testimony of Jaunes Nokes. , By Mr. Stone.— Q. "Where do you reside? A. I bave lived atthe Navy Yard in this pity since 1S27. CJ. l>o you know the prisoner Harold? A. I have known bim from his birth, about twenty-two years, I believe, (J. Have yon seen a good deal of bim? A. I have been intimate in bis family tor about eighteen or nine teen years. Q. How large a family? A. Seven or eight; be was, tbe only son. .. , . , CJ, State what is his general character for boyish-;. ne ss; whether he was easily persuaded or led away. A. I have always looked upon him as a light, trifling boy, of very little reliability. Q. Is he or is be not easily persuaded by anyone around bim.? A^ 1 should think hewas. , Q. More so than the geqeralily of young men of bis age? A. Yessir, Iain, certain of that. ' Q. Would be be especially liable to be led away by any oneoflascinating address? A. Ihaveneverheard bim enter into any argument with any one; all his conversation tbat I bave beard has been of a light and trifling character. Testimony of William H. Kflellotts. By Mr. Stone.— CJ. "Where do you reside? A. I bave lived in :this city fur fi I'teen years. CJ. State whether you know the prisoner. Harold, well? A.»Ido. Q. Have you known bim all tbe time? A. Yes; for nearly, thirteen years. . Q. Slate whether you saw bim during tbe month of February lost? A. I think I did. ,;Q. How often? A. X could not plication jor a position eith< r in4he Engineer Corps or on my Staff; I told bim I could not give him a position in either, but that if be would enlist as a private, from his representations of himself as. an engineer and a draughtsman, I would put bim, on duty in the Engi neer Corps as a private; ontbese conditions he enlisted as a private in the StonewalJ Brigade, Second Virginia Infantry, and X assigned him to special duty at head quarters; he was to act as draughtsman and assist my engineer officer, and be so continued to act till I was told be bad left. CJ. Was he subjected to court-martial at that time? Question objected to by Judge Bingham, on the ground tbat records of courts-martial must be pro duced, ahdhe did ndtthinktherewere'anycourtsdown in Virginia in these days that could try at all. Mr. Aiken stated that, as under Jbe circumstances the records of the court could not be produced, parole evidence could be admitted, and he presumed tbe question was not seriously objected to. 1M TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON, The objection was sustained by tbe Court. CJ. Where in Virginia was your encampment after the battle of Gettysburg? A. Near Orange Court House. ^ . CJ. Do you knowor not of a meeting of the officers of that Brigade at the camp of the Second Virginia Regi ment? A. I know nothing of itj and never heard any thing of the ki«d. , CJ. Didyou ever learn the fact tbat a secret meeting was held there at that time? A. I never heard of any such secret meeting. CJ. Did you ever a£ any meeting of the officers of your division hear plans discussed for the assassination of the President of the United States? A. I never heard any plans discussedin any meeting of tbe officers* nor did I ever hear the assassination of the President alluded to by any individuals in my division. , , CJ. Are you. acquainted with J. Wiikes Bopth, tbe actor? A. I am not: I never saw bim.. / Q. Look at that picture (Booth's) and see if you ever saw the* man? A. Never, to my knowledge; 1 did not know, in fact, there was such a man until after the assassination- of President Lincoln. Q. Have you a personal knowledge of the fact of Lieutenant David Cockerill losing a horse? Jtidgej,Bingham— I object. We do not propose the question of borse stealing here, it is not In the issue. ' Mr. Aiken— The charge was made in tbe paper pre sented tbat Von Steinecker bad been, guilty ot horse stealing; and I 'understood we were to be permitted to prove any allegations in that paper. > Colonel. Burnett— Anything that is legitimate and competent to be proved. We did not' go further. • The objection was sustained by the Court. CJ. Did you ever learn anything while atthe South of a secret association by the name - Q. Did 6he show you any other papers? A. She showed two judgments obtained by Charles B. Calvert in the Circuit.Court of our county, against Mt. Surratt. - Q. Do you know, Of your own knowledge, whether tbat business brought Mrs. Surratt to Surrattsville that day? A. I only know she showed me this letter and judgments. ^ _ Q. Did you transact any business for Mrs. Surratt that afternoon? A. I made tbe interest out on tbe judgments; Q. Did she express to yon during her entire stay at Surattsville tbat day any wisb or desire to see John M. Floyd?.' A. She did not; ^ ^ Q, Were you at the place when Mr. Floyd drove up? A. Yes. CJ. What was his condition at that time? A. He was very much intoxicated. Q. Was Mrs. Surrdtt upon the point of going away when Floyd drove up? A. Yes,: she had been ready to start for some time oefore Floyd drove up; she had business with Captain GWynn, and when be came she went back and stopped. Q. At wbat time did ypu leave? A. About sundown, I judge. Q. Have you, during the last year or two, been on terms ot intimacywith Mrs. Surratt? A., Yes sir. CJ. Have you, in all ybtlr intercourse with her, heard her breathe a Word of disloyalty to tbe Government? A. Not to my knowledge. CJ. Have you at any time ever heard ber make any remark or remarks showing ber to have a knowledge of any plan or conspiracy to assassinate the President, or any member of tbe Government? A.- No sir. Q. Have you ever heard her mention at any time any plan for tbe capture of tbe President? A. I have Q,' Have you been frequently at the house of Mrs. Surratt when Union troops were passing? A. Yes sir. Q; -From your personal knowledge of the transac tions that occurred then and there, can you state whether or,notehe was in the babuVof giving them milk, tea. and such other nourishment as shehad in the -house? A.- Yes, frequently. ' a^as she in tbe habit of receiving -pay for It? A Sometimes she did and sometimes she did not. ' CJ Doyou recollect on or about the time of a large number of horses escapingfrom Giesboro' whetber or not any of them were taken up and kept on her premises? A. Some of them, X disremember bow m& Were these horses fed and kept by her or not? A. Q.' Were therall given up? A. Every one. Q. Do you 'know whether she took a receipt for them? 'A. She received a receipt, but never, got any P a' Can you state whether "you ever knew Mrs. Sur ratt tocommit any overt act of any description against the Government? 4.. I never did. *»,..,.* CJ. Was it not Mrs. SUrTatt's constant habit to ex press warm sympathy for tbe sick and wounded of onr army? A. I do not remember ever hearing her say anything about that. ' Q. Do you know of a defective eyesight on her part? A. I have been present when she would be unable to read or sew by gaslight; this has been the fact for several years. Q. Doyou recollect on any occasion of her failing to recognize immediately friends who were near her? A. I do not recollect any. * Q. Do you not recollect that on one occasion Mrs. Surralt gave tbe last ham she bad to Union soldiers? A. "I do not. Q„ Do you know of a person by the name of A. S. Howell? A. Yes, I have seen bim; he stopped at the hotel, 1 think twice. By Mr. Clampit.— Q. Did you or not, meet Mrs. Sur ratt on the Tuesday preceding the assassination? A. I can't say on Tuesday; it was a few days before. Q. When you met her did not yon ask for the news, and did not she state in reply that our army had cap tured General Lee's army? The question was objected . to by Colonel Burnett, as irrelevant. Mr. Clampit said he desired toshow that the prisoner at that time, exhibited a loyal feeling in tbe matter. Colonel Burnett replied that the only legitimate means of proving loyalty were to prove her reputation ior and acts of loyalty; these could not be proved by her declarations. ' Mr. Clampit replied that as the Government bad en deavored to prove the disloyalty of the accused* he tbougbtitwascompetenttoproveher loyalty, but be would nevertheless vary his question, and ask the wit ness what was the reputation 6f Mrs. Surratt for loy alty? A. Very good. Q. You have never heard her express any disloyal sentiment? A. No Sir. Cross-examined Tby Colonel Bnrnett. Q. .What relation are you to the prisoner, Mrs. Sur ratt? A. She is my sister. Q. Where- did you reside while she was living at Surrattvllle? A. About a mile1 and, a half this side, \ and I have-been residing there since. Q. Are you now under arrest? A. I am. I was ar rested and brought here last Thursday week. CJ. Where were you on the evening of the day pre vious to your arrest? A. At Lloyd's Hotel. CJ. Did you meet at that place Mr. Coltenback? A. Yes. Q. Did you have any conversation witb him at that time in reference to this trial? A. Yes, sir, we were talking about the trial. Q. Did youmeetamanby the name of Cottiugham there? A. Yes, I went there with him. Q. Atthe time you met Coltenback. what was said about tbe trial in reference to tbe witnesses summoned, against Mrs. Surratt? A. I think I told him I would look at the paper and see. Q, Anvthing else? A. Not that I know of; I might have told him tbat my sister found his family. CJ. What relevancy bad that to the conversation ? A. I disremember how the-conversation commenced. Q. Did you at tbat time and place say to Mr. Colten back that if be, or any one like bim, undertook to tes tify against your sister, you would see that they were got out of the way? A. Idid not say anything of the kind. Q. Did you say you would send any man to hell wno testified against your sister? A. I did not. Q. Did ycu use any threats' against him if he ap peared as'a witness against, your sister? A. No, noth ing like that. ' Q, State wbat you did say on that subject? A. I told bim I understood he was a witness, and he was to be a strong witness against my sister i and I told him he ought tb be" as she had raised his family. Cj..Did you call him a liar? A. I disremember. Q. Was there anv anger exhibited in that conversa tion? A- I did not mean it if there was. Q. Did you bave any talk about John Surratt having returned from Richmond? A. Not to myknbwledge. , Q. Did you talk about John H. Surratt's going to Richmon'd or mention anything atbont a paper showed youthat-be bad been to Richmond? A. No, I never mentioned John Surratt's name1. Q. Did you see the letter fpund by Mr. COllenbach in the bar? A. I did not. ' ' CJ. How did you learn tbat Mr. Collenbach was to be a witness? A. He told me himself. Q. When did you come in that evening? A. I think about ten o'clock: I went in with Mr. Cottingham. Q. Didyou or did you h6,t use any thread against Mr. Collenbach:? A. Not to my knowledge., Q. Woufdn'tyouknowitif you had? .A. I think I ought to; I do riot think I did use any, only in refe rence to the public press; I told Him I would look at his statement. . ," . CJ Andif youJbundfin the public press that he had testified against your sister what did you say? A. I dp not recollect. '',' , , - ,^ Q. On the evening of the 14th. when you saw Mr. Floyd and Mrs. Surratt aud Gwynn, how Ion1; had you been at Floyd's house? A. I judge it was about two 116 TRIAL OF THE. ASSASSINS-, AT; WASHINGTON. o'clock when I got there, and I stayed till about sun down, or a little after. ,, , Q. How many persons did you see there during that time? At. I suppose from tea to fifteen. , q. Did Gwyrin leave before Mrs. Surratt; did? A. I think he d'd, ' , ,,, Q. Do yourecollectwhetber be saw Mrs. Surratt on that occasion or not? A, He did see- ber. in the parlor; I went In at the door as he spoke to her., Q, Who was in there? A. Mr. Weichman, I think. CJ. Did you see Gwynn come out? A. I do not recol lect that Idid see him when he left the house and went borne. , , * CJ. Did you hear tbe conversation between bim and Mrs. Surratt? A. Np'r,I did hQt'.go into the parlorwhile they were conversing. Q. You have been asked 'here as to Mrs, Surratt's loyalty? What has been your attitude towards the Government during this, war? A. Perfectly, loyal, I think., Q. How did ypu stand when, the question ofthe seces sion of Maryland was under discussion? A* I spent $3000tohqld,herm the .Union.. and everybody in that neighborhood will testify*. Q. Have you neverfakenpart inany way against the, Governmentduring the entire war? A. .Ney/er by act. word, aid or sympathy with the Rebels. By Mr. Aiken..— Q. State if you know,fpr what you are under arrest? A. I do not. , , . ,- .. , , CJ. State if yoii bad any conversation with Mr. Cofr .tinghani about a$30Q0 reward? ¦ ,A. Our Commissioners bad offered §3000 reward tp any party who would give information on, tbe* -subject of the., assassination; he claimed it for tne arrest of John M- 3?loyd. and asked me if I would. see the Commissioners and ascertain whetber he would get it or not. CJ. When. you stated to Gollenback that he ought to be a stirring witness against yqur sister, because She had brought up his children, did you mean it. or did you speak ironically?, A. I did.not.ineau.jtat all. Q. Is it a fact that Mrs. Surratt didrear that family ? .A. Partially so. , , Testimony of Anna E. Snrratt. CJ. State your full ^ame,. A. Anna E. Surratt. CJ. Are you underarrest at the present time? A. Yes sir. , , , Q.'Wheri were you arrested? A. On the 17th of April. CJ. Are you acquainted with. Atzeroth? A. I have met bim several times. Q. Where? A. At-our bpuse in Washington citv. , Q. When did he first come there? A: Sometime after Christmas; I think It .was .in, February. , " Q. HPw Icing did he remain there, then? A. He did not stay over night, to my knowledge; he used to call ,sometirriesnowandtben., ; .,'' ' "< ' , Q. Can you state from your own knowledge whether or not Atzeroth was given to understand that he was not wanted at the, bouse? . A. Yes,' sir; ma'lrima said she did not care to have strangers there, but we treated him with politeness, as we did every one who came to thehouse. Q. Do you or do ydu not know of frequont instances in which Mrs. Surratt failed to recognize her friends? A. Yes sir. Q, Is sbe able to read or sew by gaslight? A. No sir. Q. Have you not often plagued ber about wearing spectacles? A. I told her she was too you rig-looking Lo get spectacles yet, and sliesaidsh,e,could.hotseeto read or sew without them of dark mornings; she could read some, but she seldom sewed of a dark day. Q. Do yon know Lewis J. Weichman? A. Yesl Q. Was he a boarder at your mother's house? A. Yessir- - , , Q. How was he treated there? A. Too kindly. Q. Was iter, not your mother's habit to sit up add watt fbr him when he was out late? A. Yes: just as she would wait for my brother; Weichman engaged a room for Atzeroth; wheniie came .Weichman and he used to make private signs tb each other. Q. Did, you refer tp Atzeroth or Payne? A. To Atzeroth. Q. At what time did Payne first come to your house? A. He. came one night after dark, and left early the next morning. Q. How long was that before the assassination? A. It was .after Christmas, not very long after. Q. How many times did he come there? A. He stayed onenightwhen he first came and we did not seehjrh. again for some weeks: it was Weichman who went to' thedoor, and it was Weichman who brought Payne In there; I went down stairs, and told mamma hewas there, and shesaid she did not understand and did n6t likestrangers coming to' the house, but to treat.bim politely.as she had been In the habit o( treating every one who came; he ballad two or three times after that. Q, .Did he ask for accommodations for the night?, A. Yes sir"; and he said he would leave tbe next morning, ,aud I believe he didt Q. Were ybh acquainted with' Booth?, A. Yessir, I havemet'bim., ¦ , CJ. Wh.eu,wasbei»staty6uriiouse? A. Oh, the Mon day before theassassination. Q. Did your .mother go to Surrattsville about that time? Yes sir; on Friday, the day of tbe assassination. Q. Do you know whether or not the carriage was at the door ready to, -go when Booth came? A. Yes, I think he came and found her about to go; sbe.had befen speaking about going a day or two beiore that on a matter of business, an.a she- said shte wa^pbliged.to go, ' J ' .' ' ,',,., j . Q. How Ion? did Booth retnain? A. Not ove,r a fe^ minutes; he neyerstayed long, when be camp. . t Q. Do yoii recognize- that picture as ever belonging to von? (The picture knovyn in this record as "Spring, Summer, and Autumn.'"' was shown to, the witness.! A. Yessir, itwas mine;, it was given tb me by Mr, Weicbmp.il. ' ' , ' , , . Q. Was there any other picture in this frame? A, I putpne of Booth's behind i.t, I went to a>gallery with Miss Ward, and while we were there we saw some pf Booth's, aod' as we know, him. we got some .of them, bpt my brot her told me t hat he would take them away from me and so had them. ' Q., Did you owaiany- photographs- of Davis and Ste phens? A. Yes sir, and sGejaeTal.Lee and General Beauregard and a few others; I don't remember them all. !.,.'< ,.,; - - : ¦ ¦> if" ' <\ Q, Where did yon get them? A. Father gave them to me before hisiieath, and, I. prized them yery highly on his account. ¦. , , , , Q. D'd you have np photographs, of Unaoni Gener#lgf A. Yessir; of General, ,Me01ellan, General Gran£ and Joe Hooker. L , --, .Y,^ Q.-DoyoiaijeppUect the. last- time you saw your bro ther? A. Yessir, ,, ,. r. ¦jr.- '; j ,r ( t Q, How long was that before the assassination?, i A. On the Monday before it was- two weeks; - h, i i ,Qr^Haveypu,seen Jiimsin^e?, A. Nosir. , ';¦'<< , CJ. Was he and your brother on friendly terms? AitJ never asked „bim; he used to call to see him some times; one day 'I know hesaid BPoth was crazy, and b6w4i§b,ed-lie would not:com.e, there. .. - ' Q. Wber'e was your brother, in IS61? A . At college. * Q. Whateoliese? A. St. Charles College. .• r ' Q. Was he a student there at.that time? A. Yes shs but not of .div.inity. . , ,M Q. How long was your brother at that college?'' A. For. three years; but he spent his vacations at home in August. , - " ,j Q. M-iss Snrratt, did youat your Another's house, at any tiriie, on any occasion, ever hear a word breathe^ as to any plot, or plan, or conspiracy in existence, to assassinate tbe President of the United States;?) A^ Np sir. * . , , , , , Q. Did you ever hear any remarks made with refer ence to the a&sassmarion of any member pf the Got- vernment? A, No sir. . ,,, , ,' t , ... Q. Did you ever hear it discussed by.any member >Qf the family to-capturethePresidentof the United States? A. Noshj,IdidnotJ Where ismamnpa? By Mr. Ewing— Q. WHat year did your brother leave college?, A- In 18G1 or 1862; tbe year -my father died; {sotlovpce) where is mamma? Q. what year were you m school at Bryantown? A. From X85>tp 1861; the ICth .of July was the day I left. " Q. Didyou ever see Dr. Mudd at your mother's house at Washington? A. Nosir, % .The girl here kept nervously glancing towards the dock, apd tapping thefltapdjjritb her loot impatiently. The counsel, Mr. Ewing, with an evident desire tp keep her occupied pXX the usher , came to lead her through the crowd tp thewUness room,sa.idto.:her:-r Is-Surrattsviile on the road between Washington and Bryantown? ..,,,.¦, ,.','/' By : this time the "usher had arrived,' and the Court told her that s/ie .apuld gp. , , A.s she arose sh e answered the question in the affirmative, adding, in. a Quick. Sharp voice, "Where is mamma?'' ¦ Mr. Aiken came, forward, and, felling her that she would soon see her mamma, lied her on Into the ante room adjoining court. . ",, As Miss Surratt was leavingthe stand a member of the Court handed her a small white pocket handker chief, winch she had dropped;, she snatched it from hipa quickly and rudely, without a word of thanksTNo cross-examination was, had ,of this witness, andwUfin, with teportonal curiosity, we asked the reasonswhs t,he most technical and. dry of the judges advocate simply.told us it would have been cruel, the girl hay ing a greater load of sorrow, upon her, than .she couid Testimony of Lemons. Q. State whether you know Atzeroth. A. I do sir. Q. How long . b#ve you known him? A? Sincere was a boy. , ' • ¦ ^ Q.Wereybuatthe house pf Hezekiah Mentzonthe Sunday aftertfte assassination? , A. I was sir Q. Did you see the prisoner there? A. Yessir. ' ,Q. Did you.ha-veanyconversation with him. A. Yes sir. . ^ Jfc ^pWffiityWPXMS&tipn was. ,.A. I met Atee- rotJi a* Mentz's between li and 12 o'clock onlb'e Sab bath after this affair bad occurred, and-when first I a5- SfiitSn^:M-r,'AlS!,er?th I said, are you the n?an 'that hrtWQAJ£.JjlDC0ln? ^n,d says ^e, yes; and then- we both laughed; we Was joking; well, savs T, Andrew, I i^n2U°^n(lwthe^rutll'i3it so that the President Is tliu,t TRIAL OF -THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON, in if it was sq ahout the Seward's; about the told man having his throat cut; he said yeS: that Seward was stabbed, or rather cut at, but not killed; I asked him whether it \yas correct about Mr. Grant? he said, he did'nt know whether it was so or not, and we went to, dinner, and ait the dinner table my brother asked him if Mr. Grant was killed, and be said he did'nt suppose he was, and said if it had been done it was probably by someman who got into the same train or car that he aid; I was not in his company over a half an hour. v Q. Didyou hear him say that If the man who was to follow Grant had followed him he would have been killed? A. No, he said if Mr. Grant was to have been, killed it must have been by a ma,n who got Into the same car or into the same train of the two.. Q, Was or was not the prisoner during that day very much excited? A. Well, he was confused or appeared spat tbe dinner table, and there was something be tween the young lady and hiria that he had been pay ing his attentions to. ^Q. Wasrhe paying his addresses to tbe daughter of Mr. Mentz? A. Yes sir, he had been. CJ. Was she or not throwing him tbe cold shoulder that day? A. Yes sir. it appearedso. CJ. Apd he was down in the mouth about it, was be? A. Yes sir. . Q, Were you with the prisoner all the time he was speakingwith Mentz tbat day? A. No sir. Q. He could not atthe dinner table make any re mark without your hearing? ,A. Nosir. By .Colonel Burnett.— CJ. Did you have any other talk with Atzeroth that day? A- No sir. CJ. Didn't you walk down with hini to the stable? , A. No sir,' that was, my brother. Testimony of Mr. lemons, (Brother of tlie Foregoing- Witness.) CJ, Do you know Atzeroth? A. Yes sir. . CJ, How long have you known him ? A. Some eighteen months or two years'^ . . (J. Were you at the bouse of Mr. Mentz on the Son-; <3&y after the assassination? A. Yes sir. Q. Didyouhaveany conversation with tbeprisoner then? A. lasked him about Mr. Grant, Mr. General Grant, and asked him if it was so or not; hesaid he did'nt: suppose it was, and then he said, if it is so some one must have got into the same train of cars be did; when me and him were in the yard, after that, he said, what a lot of trouble Iisee; I said; what have you to trouble you? he said, more than I shall) ever get shed of; that was about all that be said. Testimony of Mr. McAlister. Q. Do you know Atzeroth? A. Yes sir. i CJ. How many years have you known him? A. Only since March last. Q. Stat e whether or not, on the Mth day of March, he called at ytfur house and took a drink. A. Yes siij about ten o'clock; I don't know the exact time. Q, Did you notice whether he was excited or not? A. Idid not, Q. What do you knpw about his being a coward or a brave man? A. I have heard jnen say that he would not resent an insult. Testimony of W. W. Brisco. Q. How long bave you known Atzeroth ? A. Six or sevenyears , at Port Tobacco. CJ. What is his reputation for bravery ? A. He was always considered a man of not much courage. Testimony of James Keller. CJ. State whether yon are the proprietor of the live ry stable on E ^street, near the corner of Eighth. A, Yea sir, one of them.' Q*State whether or- not you ret Atzeroth have a horse on the 14th of April, out of your stable? A. Yes. a'sm^H bay mare, fourteen and a half hands high; hq got the horse about half^past three o'clock. ' Q. Did the prisoner write his name on the slate? A. He did, sir, but my partner , rubbed bff the contents of the slate a few days after. * Q. Did be write it in a small or large hand? A. In a tolerable hand. 1 Q, Did he hesitate to put his name down? A. No sir, . Q. Did you require any reference? A. Yes Sir. Q. Din he give you any? A. Yessir. Q. Who did he give you? A. A number of persons in Maryland, and some at Port Tobacco. Q. Any names in Washington?, A, Yessir. Q. Who? A. John Cookwas one. Q, Where does Mr. Cook live? A. Eight opposite me. Q. Did you go there and inquire after Atzeroth? A. Yes sir. * Q. When was that horse returned? A. I can't say; I did not stay till he returned. Q. Did he pay for the horse? A. Yes sir; he paid me Ave dollars. Testimony of Samuel Smitb. Q. Are you stable-boy at Keller's stable ? A. Yes Q. Did you ever seethe prisoner before? A. Nosir. a ^' t We*re &°-u *n the sables pn the night of the 14th of April? A. Yessir. Cj^Did the bay mare come in that night? A. Yes Q. What time? A. To the best of my knowledge, eleven o'clock; we have a clock there! but it isn't gMntz, ¦> ' Q.Whatconditiou was the mare In? A. Prettymuch as she was when she went out. Q. Did she look as if she had been ridden hard? A. No sir. Q. Was there no fbam'on her? A. No sir. (Mr. Mc Allister was-hererecalled.'&nd having testified that he' had seen a pistol and a dirk, knife in the possession of Atzeroth, and that he had kept the same for him one day, hewas shown tbe knife arid pistol said to have been fourid in the alleged coat of Atzeroth, biit declares himself unable to positively identify either. Thepistol he knew was' not thesame.) Testimony of Miss Harold. Q. Are you the prisoner's sister? A. lam; sir. The witness was then shown the coat and the hand kerchief found in the coat alleged to have been taken ^from Atzeroth's room, but she could not identity either as the property of her brother. Testimony of Captain F. Monroe. Q. State whether you had custody of the prisoners at tbe barsubsequent.to their arrest. A. Yes sir. Q. Where? A. On board the monitors: Mr. Donner then desired to hand into court a writ ten request from the prisoner Ateeroih that "his con-* fession to Captain F. Monroe be admitted. .' Counsel stated- that hewas' aware that ne had no legal right to insist upon this and tbat hemerety made a question for the liberality of the Court to decide. Judge Holt then remarked:— "I think it is greatly to; be deplored that counsel will urge such matters on this Courtasthey know and admit to be contrary to law." The Court then decided that the confession should not be received, and Captain F. Monroe was, therefore^ dismissed from the stand.' Charles Sullivan, ex-Governor Farwell, and others. were then called on the part of the defense; -but they not being present, the Court adjourned till ten o'clock to-morrow morning. WASBLTNQxoa?". May 81.-e-Be(bre the Cpurt to-day, the following evidence was elicited :— Testimony of liar tan an Ricnlea*. By Mr. Doster.— Q, State your residence. A. I re side in Montgpmery county, Maryland. Q. Are you a cousin of the prisoner Atzeroth? A. I am. Q. State whether the prisoner came to your house subsequent to tbe assassination of the President. A. He came there on Sunday evening;. Q. Give the particulars of his visit. A. I met him as I was on my way to the Church; he remained in my bouse from Sunday evening Until Thursday morning, about 3 or4 o'clock, and during that time he did not make any attempt to hide himself, but walked about and worked in the garden a little. • . Q. Did you notice anything peculiar about his ap pearance wheri you first met him ? A. No sir; he looked thesame as he always did when be came to see me. CJ. Were you present at his arrest? A. When he was arrested in the house, I' was down stairs', and he was up stairs. Q. Did he hesitate to go when they arrested him? A. He was very willing to go. Q., Do you know whether he was in possession of a large quantity of money? A. I do not. Q. Do you know anything about his reputation for courage? A. .No sir. Q. Did the prisoner have on an overcoat when he came to your house? A. When we arrested him in the morning he fiad on the same coat as he has now; it was a kind of grey overcoat. Mr. Doster then stated to the Cpurt, that all of the witnesses sXimriioned in the case ot Atzeroth wpre not present, and that he could riot proceed in the order he desired until they were present. He intended- to set up the plea of insanity, and had sent for friends and relatives ot the prisoner, who were/to be brought seve ral thousand miles distant, who had not arrived. The defense then proceeded with the cases of the other prisoners. Testimony of William S. Arnold. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. What relation are you to the pri- sbner, Samuel Arnold? A. I aril htsbrother. ¦ Q. Where do you reside? A*,A.t.Hpokstb\vn, Mont gomery county, Md. 118 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ¦n ' state wtiatyou know.if Anything, istotbewhere- Sine* gain to Baltimore On the 28th Or Jteh : on the Ifternoon of the istof April he started for s Fortress Monroe; While in Baltimore he stayed at bis father s house, and I saw him at home almost all the time I WoVthe cross-examination of the witness, which was conducted by Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett, he stated that tne only means by which he knew that the prisoner came to Hookstown on tbe 21st, was the fact that he had purchased sosne farming utensi s on .that dav.and made an entry of the purchase in a book whichbekeptat home: The pistol delivered tc .the witness oy the prisoner on the istof April was loaded at the time. The prisoner had fired the loads out and reloaded It while in the country. - Testimony «f Franlt Arnold. Bv Mr. Ewing.— This witness, in answer to a .series of questions, testified that be was a brother of thepri- sonerrsamuel Arnold; that be lived in Baltimore county, and occasionally in the city, „at bis lather s house; fhatthe prisoner slept with bim on the nights Of the 30th and 3lst of March; and that, having re ceived aletter from a Mr. Wharton, at Fortress Mon roe to which gentleman he had m ade application for a situation, he started to go to the Fortress on Saturday afternoon, April 1st, about 4}/£ o'clock. < < Testimony of Jacob Smith. By Mr. Ewing.— Tne substance of the testimony of this witness may be summed up as follows;— He re sides at Hookstown, Maryland, about half a mile from the residence of ,Wm. S. Arnold, brother ofthe pri soner, Samuel Arnold; saw the prisoner nearly every day between the 20th and 22d of March, and about the istof April, sometimes three.or.four times a day: occa sionally at the house of his brother, and again while he would be crossing witness' farm. Cross-examined by Assistant Judgei Advocate Bur nett.— I was;not sure as to. the day on which the*pri- soner came to Hookstown, having no means of ascer taining positively; he may have stayed until the 30th, or left before then. Testimony of John T. Ford. By Mr. Ewin.g.— Q. State where you reside. A. In tbe city of Baltimore. Q. State whether, .or not you are the proprietor of Ford'S Theatre,in the city of Washington. A. Iain. Q. Are you acquainted with the prisouer, Edward Spangler? "A. lam. *„ . '- Q. How long has he been in your employ? A- I think frpm three to .fbur years, at. intervals, over two' year's continuously. ¦ 'CJ. -State whether you were in or about the theatre or in this city at the timeof the- assassination of the President. A. I was in the -city ot, Richmond on the day of the assassination; T arrived there about two oiclock on that day> Q, Were yon acquainted with John WilkesBooth? A. I have known him since early childhood, since he was ten or eleven years of age, a:qd intimately for six or seven years. ' q: State whether you have 'ever heard Booth speak of Chester, and if so, in what connection? Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham objected to the question, and it was, not pressed. CJ. State whether Booth ever applied to you to em ploy Chester, who has been a witness for the prosecu tion, in yourtbeatre? , > Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham objected to the question. Mr. Ewing stated that the object of the inquiry was not to attack Chester, but rather to corroborate his as sertions, and to show that at the same time that Booth was endeavoring to Induce Chester to join aconsoiracy for the capture of the President, he was also endeavor ing to induce Mr. Ford to etnploy Chester, in order that When once in the theatre he (Booth) might use the man as an instrument. This would go to affect the case of several of,the prisoners at tbe bar, particularly tjiat of Arnold, 'who, In his confession, stated that the plan was the capture of tbe President; and also the case of the prisoner Spangler, by showing that Booth was not able to get in the theatre any instrument to assist him in bis purpose. , Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham stated that a party who conspired to commit a crime might ap proach the most upright man in the land witb whom, befbre'his criminality was known, he migbt be, on" terms of intimacy. It was th6n the misfortune' of such a man, not his crime, to 'be approached In that way, but H did not follow because Booth approached this man Chester, that lie (Booth), either living or dead, was armed with the power of coming into a court.of justice and proving what he said to that .third person. . . : The oblect ion was then sustained, and tbe question was not pufc Q. State what were the duties of the accused on the stage. A. The accused, Spangler, was employed as a stagehand, riot as the stage carpenter; he was a la borer, and his duties were to assist in getting the scenery into place, and removingit from the grooves, as the necessities of a play required; those were his duties at night: during the day he wasto assist in doing thorough carpenter work Incidental to certain playa. Q. State whether bis duties were such as to require his presence upon tbe stage during the whole ofthe' play. A. Strictly, no sir; his absence for a moment might impair the success ofthe play; and cause, dis satisfaction among tbe audience; itis very Important for the success bra play that the changing of the scenery should be attended tp promptly from the rising to the falling of the curtain; there Were inter vals, it is true, but the prisoner could riot judge exactly how long a scene might last.' Q. State whether his constant presence during the second scene of the third act of the American Cousin would be necessary. A. It would, unless hewas ac curately informed of the duration of that scene; it is rather a long scene; longer, perhaps, than any other of that act. Q. How, is it with the firat scene? A. It is quick; but a few moriieritS; the. other eight or ten minutes. Q. How is it with the second act? A. The duration of a scene, I would say, depends in a great degree upon tbe activity of the parties engaged injt; I hardly think there was an interval of mote than fiVe or eight minutes between those scenes. CJ. Therefore the constant presence o,f Spangiei upon the stage would have been necessary? A. It would. ' CJ. What were his duties, in the intervals between the scenes? A. To be 'prepared for the next change; tobe ready with his scene and to remain at hjs post of duty, as an emergency often-, arises -during the performance' of an actrequiring extra service'on his part. ' Q. State who had' the regulation and control of tbe passage-way through which Booth escaped. A. The stage manager directs and the stage carpenter executes the work belonging to that part ot the theatre, and the entire stage. Q. State the names of those persons. A. John B. Wright was the stage manager, and James J. GifforJ the stage carpenter. Q. Was the prisoner (Spangler) charged with the* duty of keeping the passageway in order?'1 A. It was1 no duty of his. unless specially assigned to bim by the stage carpenter. Q. State whether that passage-way is usually otM structedinany way. A. Itsbpulaneverbeobstructedtf my positive orders were to keep it clear and in tbe bes* order: i.t its a passage-way used by^artiea coming from the dressing-room and green-room, andin a' play like that ofthe American Cousin, in which the ladies were in full dress, it was absolutely necessary for a proper performance that there should be no obstruction there? . Q. Do you know whether, as a matter of tact, that passage-way was kept clear by the stage manager? A. The stage manager was a very exact man in all those details; I bave always found it clear, unless in the per formance of soine spectacular play, when at times it would be partly encumbered. , Q. State whether you ever knew Spangler to wear a moustache. A. Ineverdid. The witness was further examined, and the following testimony elicited:— Tbe prisoner seemed to entertain a great .admiration for- .Booth, who was a peculiarly fascinating man, and who seemed to exercise a control over tbe minds and actions of his inl'eriors; he excelled in gymnastic exercises, and his le&p from, the Presk dent's box to. the stage was not one which required any rehearsal: Me had often introduced a similar leap into tha witch scene of Macbeth; since the latter part of September last, during the entire theatrical season. Booth frequently visited the theatre, and had bis let- ters^direqted there; the prisoner (Spangler) had lived in Baltimore, and considered that place his home,' usually spending his summer months tn the neighbor hood of that city, engaged in fishing and crabbing. The rope found in Spangler's carpet bag was here shown to the witness, who testified that in his opinion it might have been used by tbe prisoner in catching crabs, though experienced crabbers used a much longe* rPpe. He had seen such a rope used by amateurs, in- regard to his visit to Richmond, the witness testified that his object In making the visit was to see an uncle, a very aged man.„anda mother-In law. who resided there. He had riot heard of the assassination of tbe President until the Sunday evening following "while on his return- Cross-examined by Judge Advocate Holt.— Could not say positively. whether the private boxes Inthe the atre Were ordinarily kepf locked; Mr. Gifford, the stage parpenter, had control of, such matters, and the keys of the boxes were kept by Uti*. James O'Briem the chief usher. The .authorized parties having tickets for sale Ibr these boxes on -the day of tbe assassina tion were witness* broth ers, lames B. and Harry Clay Ford. The play of the American Cousin, when firs* Introduced, was an exceedingly popular play, but of late years Had drawn only fair audiences. From the characters ofthe two men, and their relations to each other, witness believed Booth to have been capable of exercising -a great Influence, either for goodorevU, over the prisoner (Spangler). J • ' TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 11SJ The Court then took a recess till two o'clock, at Wbicb time the body reassembled.. Re-examination of Mr. Ferguson. 'By Mr. Ewing.— Q. State whether directly after the assassination of thePresident you saw Mr. Stewart get lipon the stage.. A. I arii not acquainted wit Mr. Stew art; after Booth passed off" I saw a large man. in light clothes, with a moustache, jump upon the stage; a mo ment afterwards Miss^ Harris called for water in the box; this large man, whoever he was, turned around and looked towards the box; some ouehalloedi catch him: Miss Laura Jteene raised her hands and said: We have caught him, or, 'We will catch him; I then saw (ftris man run out; it was probably two or three minutes after Booth run out befoiehe jumped upon the stage. Q. Had you seen anybody else run out before him? A. No one but this man Hawk. - Q. If any one had gone out before would you bave seen bim? A. I think so: I thought it was very singu lar that no one got on to the stage. Cross-examined by Judge Bingham,— Q. On which side 'of the dress circle were you? A. On the right side; oritbesamesidfl'with the President's box. CJ. How near did you sit to the private boxes on that Side? A. I went close to them', so near that I could not see what was passing below distinctly; I saw Laura Keene when she ran in. Re-examination of Mr. Best. , By Mr. Ewing.— Q, State your business in Washing ton. A. I am manager of Grover's Theatre. CJ. State whether ypu were in the habit of seeing. John Wilkes Booth during the 'fast season, before the assassination of the President, and if so whether he made any inquiry of yon with regard to thePresident attending the theatre? A. I bave seen him. About there frequently, and he made such an inquiry the day before the assassination; he came Into the officesome time during the afternoon of Thursday, and interrupted me andthe prompter ofthe theatre in reading the manu- scriptjhe seated himself in a chair and entered into a Snversation upon the subject of the illumination: ere was to be' a general illumination ofthe city on Thursday: he asked me if I intended to illuminate; I told; him -Idid to a certain extent, but my great il lumination would be on the next night, in anniversary ofthefall ofSumter; he asked me if I was going to in vite the President; I think my reply was "yes, and that reminds me I must send that invitation;'' Ihad had it in mind for several days to invite the Presi dential party to attend on*the night ofthe 14th. ,Q. Did you invite the President? A. I sent Mrs. IJn- coln an Invitation; my notes were generally addressed tb her as the best means of accomplishing the object. Q: Was there anything marked in Booth's manner of making the inquiry? A. -HIsoo1cy. By Mr. Doster— Q., State your business in this city A. I keep a drug store on Seventh street, near the ave nue. Q. Examine these articles, both brush and liquorice, taken, from Atzeroth, and see if your trade mark is upon either of the articles. A. It is not. Testimony of SI. I*. Mudd. By, Mr. Ewing— Q. In your cross-examination day before yesterday, ypu stated that your brother, Dr. Sa muel Mudd, .was a tenant of your father; I wish you to state what yon mean by that? A. I was rather con fused at the time, and- do not know exactly what I meant; I suppose-that to be a tenant a man must pay some rent; nay brother never paid any rent nor any part ofthe proceeds ofthe farm. Q. How do you know that? A. I know it very well; I kept all my father's accounts; the farm was always treated as my brother's. Cross-examined by Colonel Burnslde— Q. Did not the farm belong to your father? A. I .considered that it Delonged to ray brother. Q. Hashednytitletoit? A. No, my father has the title, but my brother has his word that it belongs tb hirii. Q. Has he any title to it? A. No; my father has the title, but my brother has his word that it belongs to him. Examination of I>r. Davis. By Mr. Stone.— Q. Where do you reside? A. In this city, near the Navy Yard. Q. Have you ever been in the army? A. I was in the Quartermaster's Department on General Wood's staff during tbe Mexican war. Q. Do you know the prisoner, Harold? A. I have known him from early youth; part of the time I lived next door to him. though for thelast several years I have lived four or five squares from him. Q. State what is his character. A. I do not know that I cafl state it in any better terms than that he Is a boy: I consider that all his life there has been verv lit-" tie of the man about him: from my knowledge of him I should, say that nature has not endowed bim with as much intelligence as people generally have; Lknow his family well; I have always known them; I suppose he is about 22 years old. , . Cross-examined by Judge Bingham.— Q. Do you think tbat Harold has intellect enough to know that it is a great crime to commit murder? A. He undoubt edly knows thedifference between right and wrong. Testimony of Henry Oay Ford. BV Mr. Ewing.— Q. What business were you engaged in immediately preceding the *14th of April last? A. I was treasurer of Ford's Theatre. Q. When was it first knownthere that the President was coming to the theatre that night? A. It was known to me about half-past eleven o'clock; I had been to breakfast and came back, and then learned that the President had engaged a box. ' Q. State whether J. Wilkes Booth was at the theatre after that ou that day, and if-so, at what time? A. He was there at twelve 'o'clock; about half an hour after I returned. Q. State whether or riot the fact that the President was coming to the theatre that night was communi; cated to Booth. A. Ido not know; I did not tell him, Q. Did you see anything of Booth afterwards that day? A. Not until evening; Q. Did you see him when you were going to the theatre that day? A. No: I saw him coming down the street, I think, as I stood In the door of the theatre; he comrhenced talking to some parties there; one of them went to the office and brought out a letter, which he sat down and read on the steps of the office; this was about twelve o'clock, and, he stayed, I should think, about half an hour. , ,. . Q. State what you know ab put the preparations of the, theatre for the reception of the President that night? A. When I got t6 the theatre my brother told methe President was to he there that night; it was Mr. Baybold's business to see about the decorations ofthe box; but ho had neuralgia in his, face that day, and I fixeditup;! fouudtwo flags which I looped up and placed in position, then another flag came down from the Treasury Department, and I attended the putting the now flag in the centre; I had a part of the furni ture changed; a sofa and high-backed chair brought 120 TRIAL OF T®E ASSASSINS AT' WASHINGTON. from the stage, anda rocking chair brought from my sAeeping-r6om, up stairs. .,, Q. Didyou receive any suggestions from anvbody.as tp>the preparation ofthe box? A. Only trom Mr. Ray- bold and from the gentleman who Drought the third gas down there. , CJ. What had Spangler ,to do with the decoration of the box? A. He took out the partition between the two boxes, leaving tliem both in one. ¦ ., -. Q. Was it usual to remove the partition on such occa sions? A. Yes. we always removed it when the Presi dent came there. , ., CJ. How many times had the President .been jat your theatre during the winter and spring? A. Isuppose about six times. .. Ci. How did Spangler come to go to the box? A. I suppose Mr. Eaybold sent him. CJ. ,W as Spangler in the box duringthe timeyou were there deeoratiifg it? A. No. he was at work on tlie - stage at that time: I called for a hammer and nails, which he handed up to me. Q. Do you know whether he was apprised ofthe fact that the President was to'come there that evening? A. He knew the President was coming, fbr he took out the partition. CJ. Do yqu know whether there- was ¦ any penknife used inthe preparation ofthe President's box,?,, A.I used apenkni:eiu cuttinga string by which the pic ture was tied; I forgot it and left it there. CJ. Had the picture been there before? A. No. CJ. Why was this chair brought from your sleeping room to the President's, box? A. For nothing more than to put it with tlie ,o(her furniture; it was a part of the same set of furniture whjch was originally placed m the reception room;,bnt the ushers were in the habit of lounging in it, and,I took itloto my room. Q. Do you know whether Booth was in the habit of engagi ng any boxes at your theatre? A. Yes sir. ¦ Q. What box is it that he was in the habit ot en gaging? A. Theohehe always: engaged was number 7, which was part of the bpx occupiedby the President nearest the audience. ., Q. How often did lie occupy that box daring the sea- eon? A. He procured a, box tour or Ave times; I do not know whether he ever occupied it or riot, Q\."1 you know Whether Booth's spur caught in one ?l *?S flaSs a9 ue leaped. frojn. the, box? A- f did hear that it caught in theblue flag in the centre; I do not know it. -r ¦" Q. .Who put that flag- there? A. I did; it was the one obtained from the Treasury building: Q. Was there anything special or unusual in the ar rangement of that box? A. The- picture* had never been plaoed in front of the box before: we mostly used smaller flags, but as General Grant Was tocome with the. President thatnight, we borrowed thbse flags from the 1 reasury Department. - • Q. State where you were during the performanceof the American Cousin, prior to the assassination. ' A. In the ticket office. - - ' , ¦ Q. Were you not on the pavement, In front, at all duringthe performance. A. I suppose I must have passed in and out two or three times. Q. Did you see anything 6f the prisoner, Edward Spangler during that time? A. No sir. ""<"" Cross-examined by Judge Bingham.-Q. Do you Know the fact that the other boxes in the theatre were or were«ot occupied that night? A. None were oc cupied.! thtnk: I could tellbyfooking-at thebooks.' Q. Do not you remember DBaes ibeing applied for apdthe, answer being given that tbey were all taken' A. None were applied for to me. y/eiermraSm°a SeU ft,l'the tioket8? A- N°: there LS-'oB6-^0\?d''i;°9W^hat; Bnoth occupied' the other boxes? A. No sir; from my information he did not. .£; ?rLaJlyboaye,sS f1r hlm? A. No applicatipns of any kind were made to me for them ; there may have been applications made that I know nothing Itwas very long: it was either four or eighty pages, I am not certain which. Q. Had it beenpublished at the time Booth left the 'theatre that the President would be there that night? A. When I came into the theatre that morning my brother told me that he would write a little notice and- put it into the evening papers that the President was ¦ to be there. ¦',, , CJ. When could any one, have had a knowledge of, the fact, unless they came to the theatre? A. Notun- less my brothertold them. Q. In what, direction did Booth go after \ he left the theatre?, A. I do not know. Q. Did he seena to be in .a, hurry to complete,' the conversation and' get a\yay from the theatre? A. No sir. . .-,.,., Q. When he learned the fact that the President would bertdjierethateyeriing, did you notice auvpar-' iticular change in hismanner or, conversation? a. Nq sir; he sat down on toe-steps^ opened hia letter, and oc-' casionally would 10,0k up and laugh. , Q. Do you recollect the name ofthe messenger from- the Whiie-House?, -Nosir.IdOiidt,' i. CJ. Djd this conversation with Booth take place in the, theatre? A. No; but on the sidewalk in front ofthe gallery steps. . CJ, where was he, when be read the letter?', A. He, sat rnthe main entrance door of the. theatre.' , '" Q. Do you know who was with,, him lrom the time he came, there, got the letter, and went away? \A; There was some young men talking with him; I recol lect Mr. Gi fford, Mr. Evans and Mr. Guerilar " -,<- CJ, Is Mr. Evans an attache-of the theatre? t A. Yeas an actor there., ¦¦¦,.' ,..,., By Mr. Ewing.-MJ. Bo you. think if there had been ai hole in the wall in thelittle passage between the Presi dent's box and thewall,, four or five inob.es one way, and two inches the other, cou}d you have noticed it ?- A. Ifthedoor had been opened against the wall ift would have brought it behind, and I would not have noticed it; if the door had been close,!, I eertainly. would, have noticed it. CJ. Is not that passage pretty dark even when- the' doorisopen? A.- Yes. , -, Q. Did you observethe side of the wall ? A. I didr not take particular notice of f t. CJ. If there had been an augur hole through the par-, tition with the President's box would you have been likely to notice it ? A. I do not think I should. , " , : Q. Eld you ever see the prisoner Arnold about the Theatre? No, Ido notknowhimatall. By the Court.— Q. Do you not know that the intended visit of thePresident was published in the morning pan pers? - A. It was not. CJ. Did you state in a drinking saloon, near Ford's Theatre, that the President was to be there? A. No sir- Q. Was.it announced that General Grant was to at tend the theatre in company with the President? A. It was. Testimony of Wm. Withers, Jr. By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. In «your previous examination you were unable to state definitely whether the door leadingout of tjie passage vvhere Booth went was'shul or not, can you state now? A. Yes , the door was shut. Q. Do yon recollect that fact distinctly? A Yes- after he knocked me' down, as I stated in my forme* testimony, he made a plunge for'the door, which wad shut.-JjutTi^opened. it ver^' easily, 'rushed out aid pulled the door after him. • " ' ' Q. Were you at the theatre that day at twelve o'clock9 A. I cannot recollect; I think I had a rehearsal that day at (en o'clock; there was no music intbeAme* can Cousin requiring it; but I think w'e had a rehearsal ofthe song I composed. ' Q. Did you see Booth or not during that day? A I did not. ^ hS'inrt V?,w ''etner'nere wereamvnortices in the.wall behind the President's box when you was up there decorating it A. There were not. wasuptneie CJ. \ ou know there was one when the President was y^jS™^ do/ou know it? A. I have heard so; I have not been in tbe box since. «««u w, -i f iS- * S? ther? a !>,ar there for the purpose of fastening none oor that "^rnopnr I! Jsw? rt^WAa8There ai?y snoh contrivance there before that ^¦i'.E'J h^0' WS * know th*?«»« thByf?„r,'t,4Kien'"^a ^^JS^fi'5' saw Booth inthe Si! le f,- at ?ay hV >0°e did he remain? A. I sup pose n:tltsn hour: I, went into tho office and when I TTasUielettS^othhadalonKor short one? A. I &^T&S^^^ag?g£&^l£ Testimony of James Rv Ford. . By Mr. Ewing.— Q. What business were you engaged m about the time ofthe assassination of the Presi dent? A. 1 was business manager at Ford's Theatre. i„?o J£f ? wliS X°u.wer? aPP™e* «>»» the President intended to visit the theatre that night? A. At about half-past tenp'olock that day the young man from the President s house, who usually' came on such errands cameon thatoecasion;.!) .do not, know his name- he seemed '.? bearunuer; he had been to the theajreJwlf a dozen tunes tor hox.es previously: =••«¦" thatrffiht?thA.NoSslrnt **** pl-e^ously '»^a for Q. State whether oiil that day, and if so, how soon after you received that information it was communi- !=.a^,to,J'W^?B10tll? A' Isawhimabouth2impSt 2 o'clock, some .two hours after I had received the m- tormation.,on the cornfer of Tenth and E streets. He was going nb towards Eleventh street. Ido not know whether he nad been at the theatre tiS; $ v1S»?,yolff1?wled??of the. President's inten tion of v siting the theatrethat night previous the re- tp^eS?,1JIns l&la mes?age? A. Nosir. pre"10us Ine r6^ ofTh?rS(f %?' &? anyteinS '" do with the decoration whatever? Presfae»t was tb occupy? A.1 Nothing TRIAL OF THE. ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 121 ment; I could not obtain the pne I wanted; a 36-foot Q. State whether or not, on any occasion, you had a conversation with Booth as to his purchase of Utpds,* andiiso, wheie? ' Quest,on- objected to by Judge Bingham, as irreva- lent and immaterial. ' Mr. Ewing -stated that in the testimony of the wit ness Weichman a conversation at the National Hotel, between Booth, and tne prisoner, Mudd, was intro duced as a circumstance showing Mudd's connection with the conspiracy. The purpose of this evidence • was to show that, if that conversation ever occurred, it proved nothing, inasmuch as conversations on the part of Booth with various parties in reierenee to the purchase ox land in' the lower pare of Maryland, were artery irequent. Tqe objection was sustained by the Court. Ci. I)d you know of a visit made by Bomb, into Charles cc-in.y Ja*t fall? ' A. I don't know £±ceptfrom what he told mo. JVr Bingham.— Yon need not state what he told you. Mr Ewing Insisted 'on the question being answered in mil., Col. Buraett^Have you answered that question? ' Witness.— I tay I have never known him togoihere, Q. Have you ever beard him say what his purpose Was in hay Visit he may have made to Charles county last fall? ¦ Question objected to by Judge Bingham and objection sustained. By Mr. Cox.— Q, Did you send notice of the Presi- aent's intended visit to the Star that afternoon? A. I did of bis intent.'un and of tnat of Generai Grant; I sent it about twelve o clock. Q. In whose handwriting was it? A;- In mine;, I wrote h. , Q. Abftut what time did the first edition containing that notice appear? A. About two O'clock, 1 think. Q. Had vou sent It beibre you met Booth coming up the street Vita thatietter? A. Yes. Q. Bid you have any conversation with Booth that flay? A. No, jl merelyspoke lo htm. By Mr. Aiken— (ci. Do you know John H. Surratt. A. Wo, sir. Q. Did you see any of that description (picture of Surratt shown) about there tbat ciay? A. I don't Know any such person. ¦ U- Do you«know the actor, McCullough, and if so, do youknow whatt.imehelefi.the cuy. A. I know him; heleftl believe when 1'orrest did, wnich I believe was the first of January; he played an engagement with him. ' Q. Did McCullough return to this city in company with J?'orreot;oj the first of March? A. He did, oil Forrest s last engagement; Ido not know what time that was. Q. Was it before the 1st of April? A. tthink so. Q. Do you know of your Own knowledge whether McCullougn had left the city before the 1st of April? A. I do nut; i have no means Of knowing when he leit; 1 could ascertain lrom the ,bOoks of tne theatre when .Forrestle^t. (jross-examined by Colonel Burnett.— Q. Where were you when you wrote that notice for the Star? A. I was in the ticket ottice; no one was present. Q. Had you had 'any conversation with any one about senflmg that notice? A. lasked M'r. Phillips. the actor, to write me a notice, and he said he would alter w.iting tne r.egulai: advertisement. U. Did you speak toany oheelse? A. Ispoketomy younger brother about the pi-upriety of writing it; I did hot speak to any Oheelse. .' ^ l. „ Q. Had you seen Bqoth prior to writing that notice? Q. How did you send it away? A. I sent one to the Star and earned the Other to tne oflica Oi the Hejmba- can myself., Testimony. of JT. Boney. ' Q. Where were you on the night of the 14th of April? A. At ford's Tneatre. , Q What was your business there? A. I was playing what iscalled "responsible utility." ,, ¦ Q. State whether you knew anything of Booth's havintrrodeuptoihe aUsy door and, caUed.ior tsimn- Kler-* A He cal;ed tor me first; I don't know whether be came on a horse or not. but, he told me to ask Snansier to come and hold hid horse; I didn t see the hors(?lwas oathe opposite side, aud Isaid '"Booth wants you to hold his horse;" he weu.t; Booth came inside, and said he, "can I go across the stage;" said I, "no. the dairy scene ison;1' Spangler, then called me, andtoldmetoeall'-PeaNut John," to hold the ho," e, saving that Gilford was away and the responsibility oi'tne'scene wagaii on bim. , ••>.,.• • - „ * Q.' Did you see Spangler any more that evening? A.; Idid: three or io,ur times. , Q. Where? A. On the stage. . .Q>. Was he in his proper position? A. Yessir. . ¦ Q. Didyouseehimaboutthetimetheshotwasfired? A. About two minutes before. Q. Where was he then? A. On tbe same side of the if? Did you see him after the shot was fired? A.. I saw him "live or six minutes alter. Q, Where was he then? A. On., the stage, with a crowd of people. G> What was he doing there? A. I tcok no notice of him ata.l. Q. Did you seo Booth as he left?, A. I saw him as he made his exit at the first lelt hand entrance; hehad,a long double-edyed knife that looked like a new one. Q. D.d ypu see. 'anybody follow him? A. I did not see any man get on the stage until he had made his exit. Q. How long after did you see a man get on the! stage? A. Two Or three seconds. , » Q. Whogotoulh6SiagetU\-.tafterBooth? A. A tail; stout gentleman with grey clothes: I think he had a moustache. Q. What did he do? A.. He made hia exit the same way that Booth did. Testimony of J. J. ©afford. Q. Did you know apytblng of a horse and buggy be? longing to Booth being sold a week or so beiore tne as sassination? A. 1 beard Booth tell Spangler to send thehoise and buggy to Tatt-ersall's and sell it, one week beiore tbe assassination. Q. Do- you know Mr. Jacob Witherspough? A. I knew a man who worked in the theatre by tnat name; hewas there two or three weeks. ¦ , Q. Ktate Whecber or not, since he was released from; Carroll Hall, or just previous tp his release, he told yon atthe prison of, tbe assassination of the President, not to say which way he went, meaning Booth; and did he say that Spangler hit him on the lace with the back of h s hand? At No sir; he said he had been down andj had nottqld a.i he knew, and wanted to know ifbq could make another statement; I told him certainly, and that.he ought tq be very particular and state the wnble truth. ' Q. state whether you know anything of the accused, Spangler, being iu the custom of craobing and other fishing. A. Yes, I' know he would go on Saturd'ay; nightandstay till Sunday morning; I have never seen him fisiiing myself Ci. State whether his roRe could be used for that pur pose. A. Yes sir; but they tie another small Une. ont of the end, ' ^ Testimony of D*. McKinn. Q. Where do you reside,? A. In Washington, in the eastern part of the city, Q. Do you know Harold? ( A. yes sir. Q. How long have you known him? A. I don't know when Ibavenotknownhim.for the last two year's;, I have known liim very well for the last six #ears. Q. State. his character. A. lie was a light. pnre- liable, trivial boy. and is in mind , about eleven .years Of age; I never would allow him to put up a prescrip tion Of mine, if 1 could go. elsewhere, believing tbat he would tamper with it it he thought he, could play a joke upon anybody by it. The Court here adjourned until ten o'clock on Fri day morning. Washington, June 2.— After tbe reading ofthe re cord, the examination of witnesses for the : defense was resumed. , Tcs« Simony of Castries Bulger. ByMr. Ewing.— Thesubstance ofthe testimony of this witness was as follows:— Witness knew the prisoner! Edward Spangler, havinghoaijded at a house at which the prisoner boarded for five or six months; after the assassination the accused remained at the 'house- for several days. Testimony of Joton Gnintber. By Mr. Ewing.— The testimony of this witness was substantially the same as that ofthe previous wit ness. He testified tohaivihg boarded for several years at the bouse at which the prisoner stopped for six or seven months, and was certain of having seen him about the boarding house some two or three days after tbe assassination. Witness never saw him wear a moustache. Cross-examined by Judge- Advocate Bingham.— Saw the prisoner generally in the.morning or evening; the accused did hot sleep-at the boarding-house. Testimony of Tliomas, J. Reynold. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. State how long you have been in Washington, and what has beenyouroccupationberefc A. I have not lived permanently in Washington, only since the last Monday of December- one year ago. at which time I oame to Washington for Mr. DFord ; I was employed at that gentleman's theatre to take charge of the house; to see to the front of the bouse, and pur chase everything that was to be purchased fonthe. house; any repairs to the house were done through mg orders; tbat was my business there; in the absence of either of -the Messrs. Eord, I went in the box-office and sold the tickets. Q- State whetber you know anything as to any of tho locks of the pTivate boxes being broken, and if so, what vou know. A.. I think it was during Mrs, Bowers1 engagement, in March, about the 7th, when being one 122 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON^ £ fiaVat dinner, Mr. Merrick, of the National Hotel, asked me to reserve some seats for him tbat evening, three I think, in the orchestra: I did so; Mr. Merrick had not arrived by the end ofthe first act, and as it was customary for all reserved seats not occupiedatthe fend of the first act to be taken by -other persons rresent wanting seats, those seats were taken shortly after that; Mr. Merrick, accompanied by'liis Wife, Mr. Martin and several ladies came in and rwas in'ormed of their arrival, and asked wbat I bad done with the seats reserved for theni, and I went to see about them. and found tbat the usher had filled them; I then took them up stairs to Box 6, which was locked andcpuld not be entered; 1 then crossed to Boxes 7 and 8, gene rally termed the President's Box, which were also iocked; I endeavored to force it open by applying my shoulder to the door, but failing in that I used my foot and succeeded in kicking it open. Q. State whether that tier led into the box which the President occupied at the time of the assassination? A. It did, by request; when. thePresident occupied the box we would take the partition out, and the two boxes would then be occupied as one. t Q. When the two boxes are thrown into one by which door do you enter the President's box? A. The door of Box 8. Q, Do you know whether that was the door that was tisedo'nthe night'of the assassination? A. Yessir.it was; the other one could riot be used- Q. Do you know wbether the lock that was burst open was afterwards repaired? A. I do .not; I-never examined it afterwards; \T suppose it was my place to have reported the fact, and though J frequently passed into the box afterwards I never thought of having the lock fixed.. i Q. To whom would you have reported for repairs? A. ToMr.Gifford.. - ' Q. But you made no report to him of it? A. Nosir, I never said anything about it; I never thought it worth while to mention it. G> State whether you have any knowledge of Booth occupying either of those two boxes shortly before the assassination? A. I cannot say precisely the time/but ft wasahouttwoweeks.I think, prior to the 14th that Mr. Booth engaged private box No. 4, and in the even ing of that day, came again to theoffice wbilel was sitting in the vestibule, and, asked for an exchange of the bbXfor box No. 7, one of the Presidential, boxes, and' the one in which a bole was found to have been bored he.occupied that night, either box No. 7 o'r-8, 1 cannot swear positively which box. Q. State whether there were any box tickets sold at the theatre up to theti'me of the opening. A. To the best of my knowledge there was not; Isold none; I was not in the office all the time that day; I was there dur ing the afternoon, and also in the'niorning, when the tickets were obtained for the President by his messen- 1 ger; I do not know positively whether there were any sold, or whether there were any applications for any. * Q. 'State at What'hour the President engaged those seats ? A. Between 10 and 11 o'clock in the forenoon. Q. Had he been previously invited? A. Not to my knowledge. ¦ Q. Did you see tbe messenger? A. I did, and was talking to him. - Q. State whether you saw anything of Booth that morning after the President had engaged the box? A. I cannot say whether it was alter or before that time; rsaWhimthat morning; he got a letter lrom theoffice that morning: be generally came there every rnorn- ing; his letters were directed. to Mr. FjDrd's box in the Post Office and were brought to the theatre every morning. Q. Did Booth get more than one letter that morn ing? A. Not to my knowledge. Q. State if you know any reason why the rocking .chair in which the President is said to havesatthat night should have been In the position in which it was? A.' The position in which itwas then was the same in which Ihad placed it myself on two other oc casions when the President occupied that box, and the reason was that if placed in any other position the rockers would be in the way; the removal of the par tition left a triangular corner to the lelt of the balus trade of the box, and the rockers went into the corner and were out of the way; that was the only reason why I put it there. Q."When was that? A. During last winter a year ago. - Q. It had not been used in the box during this last season up to that time? A. The sofa had been used; it had not. Q. State wbat you saw of Spangler, if anything, after Bbe assassination. A. I do not recollect seeing him after that; I only knew that he was arrested inthe house on the following Saturday morning. Q. Was he not about the theatre after that morning? A. I cannot say; in accordance with my usual custom I went to Baltimore on that Saturday night to visit hay family, who resided there. Q. Was thetheatre'Closed until your return? A. It was; I returned on Monday morning. Q. Examine that rope (exhibiting rope found In the carpet bag of the prisoner Spangler) and state whether you know of any such rope being used about the thea tre, and whether, from its flexibility, you would Judge that it had been used? A. From its appearance I know that it has been used; nil' ithaa not it would be lighter in color; it is like the ropes that are generally used in the flies for drawing up the scenes; whatf§ called a border rope. , , ,,. Cross-'exalmined bf Assistant Judge Advocate Bing ham.— Q.,you say that kind oi'arope was used inthe theatre in fixing up! the, flies? A. The wings; or, at least, the borders. Q. If the rope had been used In the theatre it would' have belonged therev would it not ? A. Yes sir. Q. T-he proper place would not be a carpet-sack half a mile away? A. Nosir, I do not think it would. ".. ' Q. Mr.Spangler would not supply the theatre with a rope at his own expense? A. It is not my opinion that he did. Q. The rope, that he used, which you have described, is.a permanent fixture^ 'is, it not? A, Sometimes we use a great many of these ropes, and then take them down and they -lay top In the loft until we need them again. Q. Wasit the inner or the outer door of the box that you forced Open? A. It was the inner door. Q. Is Box 8 tlie one nearer tbe stage? A. It is. Q., Could you. by direct force, have burst open the door or the box, tlie keeper^of which Was fastened by screws, so .as to have drawn the keeper without split ting the wood? A. I might have started the keeper; it would have heen according to the length of,the screws. ' Q. Is not the facing of that door of pine? A. Yessir; as iar as I can judge. , , .-- Q» Is Jt your opinion that the keeper of the lock coujLd have been,burst off by force without splitting the wood? A. Ttbinksoj it might have been so. Q. When were you in the.box last? A. The morning alter the assassination. U- When before the assassination? A. About five minutes that afternoon. ] Q. Did you see either a mortice in the wall or a piece of wood to fasten the door? A. No sir. Q. Did you see a mortice there the morning after the assassination? A."No sir; my attention was not called to it. JQ,. State what you know, if anything, about the rock ing chair in whichthe Presidentsat being iPlacedin the box? A. I do not know whq put it there, but 1 know who was ordered to put it there; I was in the box only about five, minutes, when I assisted in fixing the flags; it was then in the corner "of BoxV. and sitting in the position in which the phair Was then placed, the Presi dent would have his bapk tp the audience, and his side partially toward the stage. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Was-it after Booth played "Pes- cara" that be occupied that box ? A. I could not tell' tbat; he ordered the box on two occasions, but on one occasion did riot use it for he told me in the evening that he would not be able to use that box, as some la dies stopping at the National Hotel had .disappointed him. (J. How long was it before the assassination that he used it ? A. About two weeks. By the Court.— Q,. Do you know of what material that rope is made? A. I think.it is a Manilla rope. By Judge Advocate Holt.— ODo yojix'or not know that the color of a rope does not otepefid on its age or its use? A. I know that water will make the color of a rope darker, but its color, so far as my knowledge ex tends, does depend upon its use. Testimony of Henry E. Merrick. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. State your business? A. I am clerk ofthe National Hotel. 'Q. State whether or not Some time before the assas- sinatfbnof thePresident you went to lord's Theatre and Mr. Beybold showed'you to a box? A. Yessir; it was on the evenirig ofthe 7th of March; I had my, wife and other ladies with me, and we were shown to a box on tbe right hand side as you pass down tbe dress circle; H was the box nearest the entrance; I do not know the number. Q. Are you certain tbat it was the box furthest from the stage? A. Yes sir. Q. Do you know any thing about the door being forced open? A. The door was forced open by Mr. Reynold, Who was unableto find the key; the keeper, I think was forced off: at least, the screw thatheldthe . upper part of the keeper came out and it whirled around and hung by the lower screw: w^e then entered the box and remained there during the play. Q. Doyou know when John McCullough, the actofri was last at tbe National Hotel? A. Our books show tbat he left there on tbe 26th of March: he paid his billon that day, and since then I have not seen him. Q. Washein the habit ofstopping at vour hotel? A. He was; I have never known him to stop at any other hotel. Q. Was he there on the 2d of April? A. Not to my knowledge. Cross-examined by Assistant Judge Advocate Blngj ham.— Q. Many persons come into your hotel ' to visit guests of the house and go awayasjam without you? knowing it, do tbey not? A. They might call there on their friends. Q. Oft the night of which you have spoken as the oc casion of your visit to the theatre you entered the first TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 123 box .that you came to in passing down the dress olrcle? A. Yessir. Q. The box next the stage you^did not enter at all" A. I did not: we entered the first box. Testimony of James Lamb. 'By Mr. EWi ng.— Q.' State where and in what capacity £ju were eraployedat the time ofthe assassination of e President. A- At Mr. ForiPs theatre, where I have been employed, l or thelast two seasons, over a year in tbecapacity of scene painter. '. Q. Examine that rope (exhibiting to witness the rope found in Spangler's possession), and state whether you have seen any ropes like that used in the theatre. A I have; but air ropes of this description bear some similarity; ropes like tbat are used in the theatre for suspending borders that hang across the tops Of the scenes; they are called border ropes. Q. What is the length of ropes used for tbat purpose in the theatre? A. Not less than eighty (so) feet- they are used lor raising and lowering the borders; these bordersare long strips of canvas, which are painted to represent interiors and exteriorst sometimes, when it Isnecessary to alter them, they are lowered upon the stageforthe purpose of being repainted; the ropes used are about the length of this one. . Q. Examine it carefully, and state whether it has the-appearance of having been used. A. It has the appearance of having'been qhafed, and a new rope would be a little stiffer, it strikes me. Q. Does it look as if It Bad been used as a border rope? A. I cannot say that there is anything about it that would lead me to form an opinion on that point: it is tbe same kind of a ro, e that is used' for that pur- iose,butit it had been so used, I think there'would-be ..knot here; one end appears to have been cut; tnere were about forty or fifty such ropes employed about the theatre. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— Q, Were ou acquainted with John WilkesBooth? A. I knew im by si^ht: I never spoke a word to him: By the Court.-^Q., Of what material is that rope? A I should say it was hemp. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Have you any reason to believe, from an examination of the rope, that it was hot used as a border .rope? A. Nosir. Q. Did you see anything of the prisoner, Edward Spangler, after the assassination? A. I saw him on Saturday, the day after thePresident was assassinated; I was' in the theatre loitering about from ten o'clock until ihe military .took possession of the building; my feelings were excited, and I remained on tbespotthe whole day, and saw Spangler several times during the day. t t Q. Wheie did you see the prisoner, and who were with him? A. I saw him on tbe stage: there were seve ral others there; Maddox, a man by the name of Jake, Mr. Giflbrd, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Carland. (J, Who were with Spangler? A. There was no com panionship particularly; they all seemed to be loitering about. Q. What time in the day was that? A. About twelve or one o'clock; I did not see Spangler since until I saw him this morning. Testimony of William R. Smith. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. State your residence and busi ness. A. I live in Washington, and am Superintend ent of the Botanic Gardens. Q. Were you In Ford's Theatre at the time ofthe as sassination? A. I was. i(J, Did you see Booth pass ofF the stage? A. I did. Q. Did you see Mr. Stewart get on the stage? A. Mr. Stewart was about the first that got on thestage; it is my impression that Booth was orf the sta^e beiore Mr. Stewart got on it; I saw Stewart turn around and look up at. the box in which the President had been mur dered; I did not watch him any further. Q. You think that Booth got, off the stage before any one got on it? A. Yes sir. i T b Re-Examinataoi% of Jacob Rittersnang'h. By Mr. Ewing.^rQ, When you were examined for the prosecution yonspoke of Spangler havingslapped you in the face after your return from following Booth, and of his saying:— "Shut up, don't say which way he went?" A." Yes sir. CJ. Did you make the same statement the next day when you were in the theatre to Mr. .Lamb, aud ou the night of the .assassination to Mr. Carland when he aroused you from sleep? A. Yes sir; Mr. Carland, when Me awakened me, asked me what Ned said to me, and I toid.him that Ned had slapped me in tbe mouth and said:— "Don't say which way he went." " Q. Were you not on the stage on the alternoon of tbe daj' of the assassination? A. Yes sir. Q. State what you and Spangler saw. - A. I saw a man in the dress circle smoking a segar, and I asked Spangler who he was; he said he did not know; I then said we ought to tell him to go out, and Spang ler said he had a right there; I resumed my work and alter awhile looked around again, and saw the man sitting in a private box. on the right-hand side of the stage; alter that the man went out.- Q Was the man near enough to hear what Spangler said? A. Yessir. ' By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.-Q. Doyou kuowwhat man that was? A. No sir. fi>SMf'EAWKiasr.Q- Wljat time I» ^e evening was nn 2mm, A^-o' "jodock in the evening of the day «2-^i2L ™i!i?fresident was assassinated, and just bfr- lore we went to supper. / ¦ By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.-Q, Where am £??rtsay thnt ^.anwas ? A. in a private box, one- SdeSffiJoJtSSf8 m ****** the right iandl Testimony of Louis J. Carland. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Statewhetheryou are acquainted with Jacob Bitterspaugh? A. I am. i««mLC« Q. State whether you saw him in Mr. Gifford's room' on the night of the assassination alter it had taken place, and what did\R&terspuughsay,on that occasion? A. He was asleep, and on my awakening him he ap peared frightened and thought I was Mr. Booth: I asked him where Spangler was, and hesaid he did not' know, that when he last saw Spangler be was standing behind the sceueg lust after Booth ran out the baca part ofthe theatre, and that he said to Spangler, "that was Mr Booth," when Spangler slapped him in the mouth and said, "you don't know who it was: it might have been Booth, and it might have been somebodyelse " Q. Did-RitterspauKh tell you that Spangler slapped himvnthe^'ace and said. Don't say which wavhe went? A. Nosir. Q. Didhe tell you anything to that effect? A. No' sir. a. Are you sure that he did not say it to you? * A. I' am certain. Q. Where was Spangler. when you first saw him af-' ter the assassination? A. In the theatre on -the stages I was iu his company till Sunday night, when I went" to the Hermann House,- and he went to sleep in the theatre; I suppose he left to go there to sleep, . Q. Where was he during Saturaayapd Sunday? A.s On the-Saturday night alter the murder he was going to sleep in the theatre as usual, but there was some talk about burning the theatre, and, being a heavy sleeper, he was afraid to sleep there, so he came to my room and I let him sleep there all night; on Sunday morning I wentto church, and met him again in the street near tbe theatre; we walked around that after-." noon and parted in the evening. Q. Do you know whether or not, during those two" days you were. with. Spangler, be had much money? A. He had very little change. Q. State whetber Booth often frequented the thea-" tre and stayed about there a great deal, jusd-on Wbat ' terms was he with the employees? A. On very inti mate terms;- he seemed to become familiar with peo ple on a short acquaintance. The rope found in Spangler's carpet-bag was ex hibited to the witness^ when he stated that it resem bled one used by Mr. Spongier and Mr. Bitterspaugh, about two weeks before the murder, to carry up some lumber to the fourth story ofthe theatre. He thought it had the appearance of having been fisedand of hay* inglain out o^doors. Cross-examined by Assistant Judge Advocate Bing-s ham.— Q. Spangles usually slept in the theatre?, A. Ye3 sir. ' Q. He did not sleep there on the night ofthe mur der? A. No sir. , Q. Did he sleep there on Sunday night? A. No sir. \Q. Where and at wbat time did you awaken Bitter spaugh? A. Itwaso.nthefirst floor.in whatwascalled the manager's office, at about twelve o'clock on the night of the murder: I was alone at the time. Q,. To whom didyou tell what Bitterspaugh said to you? A. To nobody but Wm. Withers, Jr.; I told him on the Sunday afternoon after the assassination. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Was Ritlerspauffh fully awake when you had the conversation with him? A. Yes sir. Testimony of James S.yon. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Are you acquainted with Jacob Bitterspaugh. A.- Yes. ¦ Q. D.a you see him on the day after the President .' was killed? A. Idid, on Saturday. Q. Did he say anything to you about a conversation he had had with Spangler directly after the assassina tion? A. Yes; he was grumbling and saying -it was well for Ned that he had not something inrhis hand atthe time; witness asked why: sa.d he, '"Ned struck medast night a very hard blow, and said shut up," at tho same time, "you know nothing about it." . Q, In what connection d'd he say tnat happened? A. He said be was acquainted' with Booth, and re marked to Spangler ai Booth ran out, "I know who tbat was; thatiwas Booth who ran out;" then Ned said "Shut up; keep quiet; what do you know about it." Q. When did hesay that was? A. That was while the party, Booth or whoever it might be, was leaving the stage, that is, making his escape: this'man Jake then rushed up and was making this explanation,. "I know bim; that was Booth;'' Ned then turned around and struck bim with the back of his hand and said, "shut up: you know nothing about it; what do you know about it; keepiquiet." Q. Did or did not Jacob Bitterspaugh say that Spang ler said to him "do not, say which way he went," or any words to that effect? A, He did not, I am sure.. 124' TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT : WASHINGTON] Cross-examined by Judge Bingham.— Q. State now exactly what Jake said to you on that occasion. A. He said "I i'o) lowed out the party and was close-at his heels: I said to Spangler, I know him," or words to that effect. Ci. He said he was right at Booth's heels, did he? A. Ho. not tbat, hesaid he was nearly. ' /' Q. Did not you say he followed tlieparty close at his heels? A. Weil.'I say1 he did. and received a blow from Spangler and that shut him up. Testimony of 3. W. Bunker. ' By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. What is your occupation? A; I ana clerk at the National Hotel in this city. CJ. State whether or not alter the.assassination ofthe President you lound any articles in Booth's room at the hotel. A. I packed up Boow'sluagageandhadit removed to our baggage room on the 4ay after the as- sassinati6n. CJ. Did vou find any carpenter's tools? A. ,1 found a large-sized glmblet with an iron handle in histrunk; I took it and carried it to my room; I afterwards gave it to Mr Hall, who was attending to Ford's.business.. CJ. Do you know whether John McCullough, the actor, was in Washington 'on the 1st of April? A. I have examined our books thoroughly and find that thelast-time McCullough registered was on the nth of March; he left the house on the atith of that month; his name is not on our books after that date. ¦ ' CJ. Where was hdin the habit of stopping- when .he came.to Washington? A. He made his home at the Natibnail: I have never known of his stopping at any other place. ' Q. Did you see him in the City after, the 26th. of Hatch? A. I did' not. ', ., Testimony of Cltas. B. Hall. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. Where have you been Jiving for the past two or three months, and what has been your occupation? A. I have been acting as clerk for Mr: Wharton , a sutler at Fortress Monroe. Q. Is his store ijaside the fortifications or outside?* A. It is outside, at/what is called Old Point, CJ. Are yon acquainted .with tbeprisoner, Arnold? A. I got acquainted, with him at Mr. Wharton's store: he came therein the latter part of March or the 1st of April; I cannot fix the.date; it was on aSunday. ' CJ. State how long he remained there, and w.hathis business was. A. He: was assisting me at book-keep ing: he stayed there two weeks and oneday, I think. CJ. Didyou see hfm 'there constantly at that time? A. No; I was engaged, at another place part of the time: I saw him, however^ every day. Ci. State whether or not, and if so, when. Arnold made any application for employment. A. He did; I think.about the 1st of March some time. CJ. Do you know what became of Arnold's letter? A. Major Ktevenshas it. ' , CJ. HOW' many letters did he write applying for & position? A. I onlysaw.one; that I answered myself. " CJ. At what time was the answer written? ,A. T could not tell that; itwas aboutaweek before Arnold came: I wrote for him to come. : Q. Did you see Arnold every night^during the time of his employment? A. Yes sir; he Slept in Mr. Whar ton's store every ni&ht.i... . , , . Testimony of George Craig. By. Mr. Ewing.— CJ. State where you live, and how you have.been employed for the last two months. A. 1 have been at Old Point, and have been employed by Mr. Wharton as salesman. Q. Have you seen the prisoner Samuel Arnold ? A. 1 saw him about the latter part of March or the first of April, on Sunday, ior the first time. CJ. What boat did he come on ? A. I cannot tell. CJ. How long did he remain there? A. About two weeks, to the best of my knowledge; he was a clerk in Mr. Wharton's establishment: chief clerk I believe. CJ. How .often did you.seehim during his stay there? A. I saw him everyday; I cannot say how many times a day. 'Testimony of James Lusby. By Mr. Stone.— I reside in Prince Georges county lam not very much acquainted with John M.Floyd- I got acquainted with him since Christmas; I saw him in Marlboro' in April last; Ido hot know exactly the day; it was on Good Friday, on the day that Lincoln was killed. CJ. Did you see Mr. Floyd on the evening of that day at Surrattsville. A. I and him went that day from Marlboro'. CJ. What was Floyd's condition at that time? A. He was very drunk I thought; I reached Surrattsville about one minute and a.half before he did; I drove up to the bar-room door; lie went up to the front door CJ. Did you see the prisoner, Mrs. Surratt, there that day? A. I saw her as she* was starting out to go home CJ. Was she all ready to go 'home at the time Fsoyd drove up? A. Yes, the 'buggy was there waiting ior ber, and she left about fifteen minutes afterwards. " Cross-examination by Judge Holt.— CJ. You drove upon one side of the house and Floyd went round to the othefiside, didn't he? A. Yes; there was af'ront yard lie went through; when I first came I went into the bar-room and got a drink, • CJ. Did you see Mrs. Surratt when • vou first came?' You didn't see her in tlie bar-room, did vou? A. No. Q, Andyoudidu'tseeher wb.ynt.he 'rifrstcume up* A. No. • , ., Q. Yon dtdn/j^see her until you got your drink? A I djsrewiember whether I got mil drink when I first saw her or hot. CJ. You say Floyd wasdrurik; bow" do you know that fact? A. I have seen hitn before. . CJ. Did you see him drinking? A. Yes; and I toolr drinks with him. ' ' CJ. Which drank the most? A. I never measured miUe. CJ, Were you as tight as he was? A. Not- quite a* tight. ! ™ CJ. Were youafteryouhad theadditional drink? Yon had the advantage of taking that drink at Surratts ville, while, Floyd went around to thefciteben, hadn't you? A. I don't know; I never tried tb pass even with him: I did not Ray I was drunk; I don't know wneiher- I was, though! had drank with him right smart that' day. By Judge Burnett.— CJ. Do, you1 live* at Surrattsville' A. No; a mile and a half 'uelow. Q. What has been your business for the past two or threeyears? A., 1 have been a farmer at the time; I have hever been away from home further than Wash ington in my lile. Q. Mr. Floyd was sober enough, wasn't he, to drive i b,is own horse and to take hiafish, &c..in to thekltchen' A. He drove his, own horse; I didn't see him go to the kitchen. ' > • ¦ x Did you see hirhi fix Mrs. Surratt's buggy? A. No' I do not know anything about tbat. CJ. How long before he arrived at the house had ypu seen him? A. I came all along with him from Manboro', sometimes' in lront and sometimes behind him. CJ. How far is It from Marlboro' to Surrattsville? A. About twelve miles; it is a fast drive of about two anil a half hours. ¦ Q. Did you stop to get any drinks1 on the road? A. No. ¦ ¦ CJ. Then he was two and' a half hours wfthout'gettTng any drinks beldre he came to Surrattsville? A. Yea sir. Testimony of Matthew '$. Pope. By Mr. Doster.— Q. State'where you live and wbat your business is., A. I live down at the Navy Yard, and keep a livery stable; Idid keep a restaurant, but I do not now. CJ. State Whether or not, on or about the 12th of April, the prisoner Atzeroth called at your place amar vvauted to sell a bay horse. A. There was a -greiitleman called at my stable, I don't kho.w exactly the day, to sell a large bay horse, blindin one eye. - CJ. How old did he seem to be? A. I don't know; I did not take any particular notice 6f his age, and Ido nut know tbat I examined him adall. Q. Do you. remember the person who brought the horse there. A. I do riot Know as I would remember him were I to see Mm again. "¦' > CJ. Look at the prisoner Atzeroth and see if voa recognize him as that person? A. I dp not know. The features are nearly alike. If he was the one he is not nearly so srout a man as he was then. I did not take much notice op him. ¦ He asked me if I wanted to buy ahorse. I told him I did trot. It was some time in the afternoon; his horse stayed at the stable to rest for some two or three hours: he went to the res taurant and took a drink ; hewentawav with aman yJ.S name ol John Barr ; after a time "he came back, aud the man who brought the horse then took him Q. Don't you remember this man Barr was drunk at the time? A. He had been drinking a little; Ido not know whether he Was drunk or not ; Mr Barr wasoneofttfe mechanics at the Navy Yard- he car ried on wheelwrightlng. ¦ ««=>.*i n,1'n^??,?5ttWs th,6 very flW of tbel "umination on the part of the mechanics?' A. f do not'know:-! think it was several days beiore the assassination of the Pre sident, but I tpok very little notice. / CJ. Have you or not found an umbrella left at your house by the prisoner? A. It w«s left by the man who S»oulhVthe hotBe t0 the Btable, at the same time he eft the horse. Testimony of Miss Margaret Branson. . By Mr^ Doster -CJ. Where do you Live? A. I Jive In Baltimore, and first saw the prisoner Paynejit Get tysburg I do not remember thetime, but it was im mediately aiterthebattleot Gettysburg. I was theTe as a volunteer nurse. He was in my ward and ver? kind to the sick and wounded. I don't know whether he was there as a, nurse or not. I dor?t lmow if hi was a soldier. He had on no uniform As nearly at I can recollect he was dressed ?n blue\pal,ts Sh^n6 coat and a dark slouch hat.. He went by the name of Powell and by the name of Doctor. ' CJ. How long did you know him there? A I do not know the time; I was there six weeks and T do not .„,'.," 'hf hospital, where he seemed to be attending to the sick and wounded, were the patients both CojJ TRIAL OF TIIE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON". 125 federates and Union soldiers? A. Yes; I left the hospi tal the first week in September: I met Paynengain some time that fall and . winter; Ido not remember wben; I met him at my own home; be remained there only a few hours; I had very little conversation with him. , " Q. Did he state to you where he was going? Ob'ftctedto byJuui-e Bingham on tne ground that decda:e,Bbigham.— Well, let ber answer it. Witness— He was arrested by theauthorities and sent North to Philadelphia. /Cross-examined by Colonel Burnett.— Q. Hewas ar rested as a, Southern re lugee, was he riot, and madeto takefthe oath of allegiance? A. I do not( know what he vvas arrested for, as 1 never knew the \reason whv; lie was taken, to the Provost Marshal's office andwa.4 afterwards released and returned to the house. Q. Doyou know whether he catoy directly to Wash ington, when he left in Starch? AP I do^iot. tLDipMie make .any 'acquaintance in Washington; while he' was bO'ardihgat your house? A. Not that I know of. 1 Q. Was he "absent anytime while be was at your house? A. Neverbnt oneiiight tomy knowledge, Q. How manypersons boarded at, your house? A. I do not know. CJ. Were,! bere any other Soqthern refugees boarding at yOiir house? A. Mone'bu'thim. By Mr. Doster.— Ci. Was or was n£>t the prisoner, aui ing the month or February, gdhe long enough tQ have made ft. journey to Canada and' back again? A. Not to ro y kno w)edge. Q. If behaji been would yqn haye, known it? A. I certainly would. Q. In ys'hat (hospital did you see him at Gettysburg? A. In the Genera! 'Hospital; Dr. Chamberlain's. Q. Who did tbeprisoner seem to be nursing, the Con federate, pr Union wounded? A. He attended tQ different ones ip my w^ard, and I had both in my ward; Q. Was your m&ther with you. there? A. No. Testimony Of Margaret Karaite. , , !BV Mr. Doster.— Q. State whether you are a servant in the house of Mr. Branson-. A. Yes sir. Q. Didyou seethe' prisoner Payne there? A. Yesi he came there in January or February and stayed till iabout the middle of March. Q. Do you remember at any time, a controversy thai Payne had with the negro girl there? A. Yes, he asked her, to clean up his rooms there; she said she would n,ot doit. , He asked her why. she said she would not' do it. He. called her spme names, and slapped her, ana struck her. , Q. Did he not throw her on the ground, stamp on heir body and t-ry to kill ber? A. Yes. Q. Didhe not strike her on the forehead? A. Yes. Q, Wbat did the negro girl do in consequence? A. "She went to have him arrested.. . (& DidheOrdidhenotsay he would kill her? A. He did while he was striking her. Testimony of E>r. Charles Nichols. By Mr. Doster.— Q.. Have. I at any time given yott any intimation of the answers I expect you to give be fore thjs Court?, A. Youhave not. Ci. What is your official position and your profes sion? A. lama doctor of medicine. and Superinten dent of Government Hospital for the Insane. Q., How long have you occupied that position? A. Thirteen years. Q. What.class of persons do you treat in your asy lum? A. Insane persons exclusively. Q. Are they not persons who bave been in the ser vice of the Government exclusively? A. No; mypa- tients include the insane of this district, and occai- sionally, private patients from other portions of the country. Q. Is or is not the great mass of persons you treat composed of soldiers and sailors? A. It is. Q. Please define moral insanity? A. When the moralor perceptive faculties are affected, exclusively of disease of the brain, I call it moral insanity; Q. What are some of the principal causes, inducing moral insanity? A. My impression is thatinsanityis oftener caused by physical disease than by moral causes: ph,e fact that insanity takes that form is apt to depend on the character of tne 'individual becoming insane.; : . r . , r, , , Q., Is active service in the field, among soldiers, a£ any time,. the cause of moral insanity? A. It is not a freauenDcause, but I have known of cases of moral in sanity among soldiers. > , , Q,". Has or has not insanity increased very much in the country during the present war? A. It has. ; Q. Has it not increased much more proportionally than the increase of the army? A. It has. Q. How is this increase accounted for? A. By the diseases, hardshipsand fatigues of the soldier's life, to which the^nen were not accustomed beforegoing into tbe service, I think. Q. Are young men who enlist more exposed to in sanity tban. men "who enlist in middle life? A. lam not sure that they < are; my Impression is that young men; accommodate; themselves to a change in their manner of life much more easily than men of middle age. Q. What are some ofthe leading symptoms of moral 126 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT- WASHINGTON. insanity? A. The, cases are as different as the indi viduals affected. If aman, 'for, instance, believes an act to be right which he did not believeto be right in health, and which people generally do riot believeto be rjghf, Iwouid regard that'as a symptom of moral Insainity. . Q, Is depression of spirits al anytime considered a symptom of msanitv? ''Al It is. ., Q. Isgreattaciturnityconsideredasymptom? A. It isafrequerttsymptom of insanity, though Icahcon- ceive.how taciturnity could exist without insanity. Q. Is disposition to commit suicide a symptom? A. It is. Q. Is great~cunhing In making plans a concomitant of insanity? A. The insane frequently exhibit great cunning in their plans to. effect tbeir object. Q. Is it or not-possible for a madman to confederate with other madmen or insane metf in their plans? A. It Is not impossible but itisrinfrequent. Qr Do madmen ever confederate together, in plans? A. Very seldom. . Q. Is or is not a morbid propensity to destroy a proof of insanity? A- Not a proof, but a very common attendant on insanity. Q. Is it a symptom of insanity If any one apparently without provocation or cause commits a crime? , A. I should regard it as giving rise to suspicion of Insanity, but not a proof of-it at all. Q. Is or Is not conduct different from the usual mode bftheworjd, the best proof of insanity? A. Iwillari- swerthat by saying thatno- single condition Is!a proof of insanity in every instance, but that an entire de parture from the usual cohduct of men could be re garded as strong 'ground to suspect the existence of Insanity., Q. Are not madmen remarkable for great cruelty? A. My impression Is that madmen exhibit about the Bame disposition in that respect that men1 generally do. ¦ Q: Do npt madmen In' committing ia' crime seem to act without pity? A.' They frequently do. . Q. Jf one should try to murder a sick man In, his bed, withput ever having seen him before, would It be pre sumptive proof of Insanity? A. It wouldgive^ise'in my mind to a suspicion that the man was insane; I should not regard it as proof. 'Ci. If the same person should at the same time try fo murder four other persons in the house, none of whom he bad ever seen, would it not strengthen that suspi cion? A. I think it would. Q. If the same person, in the commission ofthe deed, were. to stop fot five minutes' conversation, and then walk away, deliberately leaving his hat arid pistol be hind, andthen ride awaysp slowiythat a man could follow hiin on foot, would not that further corroborate theisuspicion of insanity? A. Itbink it wouldi'.Itisa peculiarity ofthe Insane that when they cOmmjt cri minal acts that they make little or noattemptstp con ceal them: but this is not always the case. Q; If the same person should cry out while stabbing one of the attendants, ''I am ma'd ! I am mad !" would It not be further ground for suspicion that he .was in sane? A. Such an exclamation would give grounds, inmyraind, to'a suspicion that the man was feigning Insanity. Q. What would be the grpiind for that suspicion? A. Because insane men rarely make such exclatnatibns or Similar ones; they very rarely excuse 'themselves for criminal acts on the ground that they are insane. ' ¦ Q. Do not madmen sometirhes Say they are mad? A. ' They do sometimes; but it is not feigning with them. Q. Do you not remembe'r cases in your medical ex perience when madmen have told you they were mad? A. They frequently do it in this way:— An individual knows he is regarded as insane, and if taken to task for'any improper act sometimes a man will excuse himself on the -ground that he is insane, and therefore hot responsible. Q. If thesame petson I have mentioned should, al though in possession of a sound horse, make no enbrt to escape, but abandon his horse and wander off into the woods, and come back to a house, surrounded with BOldiers, where he might expect to be arrested— would that not be an additional ground for suspicion of in sanity? A. I should regard every act or aman who committed a crime indicating that he was Indifferent to the consequence, as a ground for suspicion that he was Insane. Q. If this same person should return to this house I have spoken of with a piece ot his drawers for his hat, seeing the house in possession of soldiers, would not that be additional proof of insanity. A. I caw hardly see what bearing that would have on the question1 of Insanity. Q. I understand you to say that madmen seldom disguise themselves; the disguise in question consisted of a piece of drawers taken for a hat; I asked whether the disguise indicated the work of a sane or an Insane man? A. It would dependupon circumstances; with Insane men it is ia common, peculiarity that they dress themselves in a fantastic manner: for example. making head-dresses of pieces of odd garments; they do it apparently out of childish fancy for something fantastic to attract attention; I do not recollect the case of an insane person dressing himself in garments of that kind for the-sake of disguising himself. Q. -If this same person, after his arrest, shpuld ex press a strong desire to be hung and greatindifference to life wbu'ld that be an additional ground ior sus picion pf insanity? A, I think it would. Q Would it be further ground of suspicion if he seemed totally indifferent during his trial, and laughed when he was identified', betraying astolidity of mani ner entirely different froni his associates ? A. I thinB cT State what physical sickness generally accom panies insanity, if any. A. I "believe disease either puuctional ororganicof thebrain. always accompanies insanity; no other physical disease necessarily, or per haps usually accompanies it. Q. Is riot long continued constipation one of the physical conditions accompanying insanity? A. Long continued constipation .frequently precedes insanity but is not very frequent among the actually insane? Q. If this same person I have described had beeh suffering from constipation for four weeks, would that be' an' 'additional 'ground' for insanity? A. I think some weight might be given to that circumstance. ii.' If the sameperson during his trial, and during his confinement, never spoke until spoken to at a time when all his companions' were peevish and clamor ous; if he never expressed a want when all others ex pressed many; if he continued the same expression of indifference while others were nervous and anxious; if he continued imhaovahle except a certain wildness inthe movement of his eyes, would it not be additional ground for believing him to be Insane ? A. I think it would. , ' Q. If this same man,1 after committing the crime, should, op being questioned as to the cause, say he re* membered nothing distinctly but a struggle, with no desire to kill, would not that be additional ground for suspicion of insanity? A. I thinkit Would. Q. What are the qualities of mind or person most needed by a keeper tb secure control over madmen? A. Self-control. . Q. Are not madmen usually managed by persons of strong will arid resolute character? A. Yes; I think they are. Q. Are there not Instances ;on record of madmen towards all others, and'yetwho towards their^ keepers are as' docile and obedient as dogs towards theli masters? A. Not that servile obedience which a dog exhibits towards his master; It is true that tbe Insane are comparatively mild and obedient to certain per. sons, while they are more or less violent towards ce> tain other persons. Q. Would it not be possible for such a keeper, who could exercise such control over a madman, to direct him to comhiit a crime, and secure its commission? A. I should say it would be very difficult unless II was done In a few minutes' after1 the plan was laid and the directions given. '¦ Q. Is not the influence' of some persons over mad* men so great that their will seems to take the place of the madman's? A. There Is a great differences the control' 'different individuals have over insane per* sons, but I think it rare that the control reaches tha extent youhave described, or the extent, I may add, thatis popularly supposed. / Q,. Do you recognize , or not a distinction between riaania and delusion? A. A certain distinc tion, inasmuch as delusion may accompany any and every form of insanity, while the term mania applies to a particular ' form., which mayor may not acoonv pany delusion. ¦'' Q. I ask whether Instances of insane delusion are not ihore frequent during civil War than any othei forms of insanity? A. My impression is that they are not as frequent; insanity is of a more general charac ter, sb Car as mv experience goes during the1 war, among soldiers than it usually is. Q.J Does or does not constantly dwelling on the same subject lead to insane -delusion? A. It frequently does. Q. For instance, if a body of men who own slaves are constantly, hearing speeches and sermons vindi cating )jhe divine right of slavery, and when the In stitution was not threatened at all should finally go to war for its support, would not that be an evidence that these men were deluded? A. I think it would; but if does not follow tbat.the,delusion is not what I would technically denominate an insane delusion arising from disease of the brain, and for which a man Is ir responsible. C£ If one of these same men should own 6lavesand, believe In the origin of the Institution, fight m its de fense, and believe that he had also fought In defense of his home and friends, should attempt fco assasslnate'ttie men who were the leaders of those he believed were killing his friends, would not that give'rise to the sus picion tbat he was laboringunder a fanatical delusion? The question was objected to by Colonel Burnett; if the counsel was about through with his 'examination, he would pot object; otherwise he would object to the continuance of an examination entirely irrelevant and foreign to the issue. ' Mr.;Doster replied that he had about a dozen more questions to put; that he had sent for witnesses In Florida, who had not yet arrived, and his examination 0f Dr. .Nichols was in anticipation of their testimony,. , and in order to obviate the necessity of recalling him as a witness. ~ TRIAL. OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. TRIAL OF tHE XS^ASSINS AT: WASHINd+Otf. 127 The objection sustained by the Court. ! CJ. Is it vour opinion that the person I bave spoken of in committing the crime alleged under the circum stances was conscious that he was* -acting contrary to law, or whether he was laboring under any and what de'usion?. , • . ¦ .1 ¦ Objected to by Judge Bingham, on the ground that tbe case put was one entirely hypothetical, and as such the witness was not qualified to answer it. Mr. Doster replied that he had not the right to make the application to any particular case; that he had taken the question lrom the books he cited to sustain bis position, ViWIieaton on Criminal Daw.'' Colonel Burnett said tbat tbe counsel was pro ceeding in an examination based upon a hy pothesis, having no application to any state of facts proved in this case, and there was no law found, in any book that would- uphold htm in suciha course. The Assistant Judge- Advocates had been .n- stracted by their chief to allow the utmost -liberal'ty to counsel in the -defense^ but it vyas their duty to in terpose when counsel were proceeding. so-far as to ren der th&record absurd-and-cohtemptible. i> . Mr. Doster replied, that he believed tbe question was strictly legal , but knowing, siery wellthe result ofthe objection in this Court he would waive the question, arid put it in thisform:— ,. _ Q. Under this state of factswould. or would not, the inierenc? of insanity result thereifbm? A. If I may be allowed to make an explanatory answer, I will say tbat I have thus far given categorical answers to the questions . put; I am, as a rule, very much opposed to giving opinions upon hypothetical cases for the best of reasons, as I conceive that I have now; I could give no definite opinion upon the "facts irrinlied, tbereiore, in the questions that have been submitted; every case of insanity is a case ot itself and has to be examined withp room' locked or open 'A. Itwas locked, I think; I am not certain. •'' Q. Did you find anybody apparently lying in wait- about. tlie room? A. idid not disepver any one,, , j CJ. If anybody had been lying in wait about the room. would you have been able to see them? A. I did not look at anything but the door, and did notsee any one at the door. .L, , Q. What did you do after you got to tho door? A.. I rapped, but received no answer; I rapped again, and Said. iEi-a lpudivoioo,. "Governor Johnson, if you are in the room I must see you." Q. Did ypu enter the Vice President's room? ,;A. I did, and remained 'there half an hour. (j. While you were there-'was'thfe room visited hyany strangers? A. A number of persons came to the door; after I gut inside I locked and bolted the ddor, and did not allow any, person to come m without it was some1 one personally1 known to the Vice-President or myself; I ivlso rang the bell' ior the servants. -Q. State whether you ever' saw the prisoner Atzeroth beiore? A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Do you. take your frieals at the iXirkwdod House? A. I do/' ;' ",' ' "" " v Q. Have you not observed1 persons asking to see the Vice-President while he would be taking his meajs? A. No sir, only wheli, as I have been at the table, some gentleman would ask mp casually whether the Vice- President was in. ¦lJr Testimony of John B. Hubbard. By Mr. Doster.— CJ. State whether at times 'you are in chargeofthe prisoner, Payne? A. lam. i < CJ. Have you at any time during his confinement had an v conversation with him? A.Ihave. Q. State what was the substance of that conversa-1 tlon? )» : Assistant Judge Bingham objected to the question', on the ground that the declarations of tbe prisoner were no t admissible. . Judge Advocate Holt stated that as a confession of the.prisonervit-wouidnotbe admissible, but iimerely designated toshoWhis condition of mind, if might be considered.' v:„ - Thequestion was then answered,-as follows:— • A. I was taking him out of the court room the other. dav when hesaidhe wished they'would make haste and hang him, that he was tired of.lifef and that he would rather be hanged than come back here. CJ'. Did he sever have any conversation, with" you in relerence tothe subject of his constipation,? A. Yes sir; abouta week ago. - ' '¦ ¦ •*• ,J ¦ ¦ Q. What didhe say ? A. He said that he had been so ever since -he had been here. > CJ. Whatbadbeeuso? A. That he had been consti pated. > <• > CJ. Have you any personal knowledge as to the truth ofthat? A. Ihavenot. > ¦ . Q. To whoindid-you tell what the prisoner said to you? A. To Colonels McCall and: Dart. !; ,'¦ ByA^sistant Judge Advocate Bingham,.— CJ.1 What else did the prisoner say to you ? . A. That was all he said. ¦¦ ••¦•-. Testimony of Colonel W. Iff. H. M'Call. By Mr, Doster.— CJ. Have you at any time had charge^ofthe prisoner Payne? A.Ihave. CJ. Are you alone in charge of him? A. No sir; Colonel Frederick, Colonel 'Dart and myself have charge ofhim. Q. How is the^duty divided between you? A. We haveeach eight hours outof the twenty-four. Q. Does, your, duty lead you to be cognizantof the conduct of theprisuner in his cell? A. Yes«ir, - CJiDo you know anything with reference to the constipatipp of the prisoner? A. To the best of my knowledge, until, last evening, he had ho relief since tfte 29th of April. , Q.'Have you ever had any conversation with the( prisoner, on the subject of his own death? A. No sir. Testimony of John E, Roberts. . By Mr. Dostpr— Q. Is it apart of your duty to, take charge of the prisoner Payne? A. I have not had spe cial charge of the prlsoner;1my.du,ties are genera^. - , Q. Have 'you at any time had a conversation 'with, him? A. Yessir. , , , Q. Havp you ever spoken to him on the subject of bis own death,?, A. On the clay tha b Major Seward ,was examined, here, and the prisoner was dressed in a coat and hat, as I was putting the irons on him again he told me.th.at tliey were- tracing him pretty *3lose aud he wanted to die. CJ. Did he say tbat he was tired of life? A. I have told you all th«t he said. ,Q» You never had any. further conversation with him? A- No* at all; iiot on the subject of death; words passed between us nbw,and then on the stairway. s By Assistant Judge, Advocate Bingham— CJ. Did he say that he was, tired of life and he wanted to die? A. Yes sir. Q. He coupled with that the remark that they were tracing him pretty close; in other wprds fihdinghim out? A. Those were his words. Testimony of Lieut. Jotin W. Deinpsey. CJ. State where you are on duty? A. At No. 541 H street, iucommandof the guard, having charge of thehouse of Mrs. Surratt. CJ, Stote whether you were with the party that made an examination of the house at .the time tbe house was'searohed? "A.- 1 was with thejparty tbat 6ametothehpuseontbei9thor20th.of April; the house was searched be 'ore that; I was not in command, of the. guard that first went, to thehouse. ' [A photograph of J. Wilkes Booth was here shown to the witness, and, identified by him as the one which he had found behind a picture of Morning arid'Everithg.* The back of th e photograph bore tho name of J. Wilkes Booth in;pencil marks.] ¦ , - : ,-, Testimony Of James R. O'Brien. " ^ By Mr. EJjyiug— CJ. State where you were employed1 pn the 14th of April and for sprue months preceding that day. A. In the Quartermaster-General's office. . Q. Had you any engagement witb Mr. Ford? ' A,; yes sir; I was usher at the theatre during the evening performances. * ° a.-Doyouktiowftnythihgas to the condition of the keepers of the locks of boxes 7 ancT8? A. The keeper SKbox8waswren.caed.ouT or broken in someway;! do not know how; I was absent one evening at home sick, arid 1 aiterwards found it broken off. CJ. When did you notice that the keeper of the door P,r °03 J* liati been broken? A. I noticed it the first time afterwards that I went into the bos; that was TRIAL OF. THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON: 129 sometime before tfre assassination; I could nbt sav how Jong before. . _ Q. Do you know whether the door could be, fastened afterwards by locking? a. Tt might be locked, but I imaginetbat if shoved' it would come open; it would always shut tight, and I had no occasion to lock it. ¦ Q. How was the keeper of the door of box 7. A. It appeared to be all-right; I always locked that box. CJ. Which door was used when tbe Presidential party occupied tbe two boxes? A. The door of box 8. CJ. How was it generally left after the party entered' A. Always left open. CJ. Do you know whether the door leading into the passage which separates the two boxes from the wall had a lock upon it?' A. Nosir; it had no lock. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham,— -Q. The outerdoor.hadalatch.hadit not? A. No sir; it was not fastened at all. CJ. Box eight is nearest the stage, is it not ? A, Yes Sir. Testimony of I>r. Blanfor«l. , By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. State whetheryou are acquainted with tbe country alongthe routes from here to Surratts ville and Bryantown and through Surrattsville to Port Tobacco ? A. As far as Bryantown aud Port Tobacco I am acquainted with it, but not further. CJ. Are youacquainted with the-locLilit,v of Dr. Mudd's house? A. I am. (A map of the locality referred to, showing the different roads leading from Washington to Bryantpwn and vicinity, was shown to the witness: alsoa plotdrawn by himself,, giving the different lo calities in the neighborhood of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd's house, both of which he testified were accurately drawn.) The hour of one o'clock having arrived, the Commis sion took a ' recess, as usual, until two, at' which hour the body reassembled. Examination of Susan Stewart, (Colored). • By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. State Where you reside? A. At Mr. John Miller's, about a mile from Bryantown. CJ. How near do you live to the house o ft he colored manJohn Boose? A. Only a short distance. CJ. You both lived on tne little cut-off road leading through the farm? A> Yes sir. CJ. State whether you know Dr. Samunl A. Miidd tbeprisoner. A. Ido. CJ. State whether you saw him on tbe day after the President's assassination, and where? A. IsawDr: Mudd on Easter Saturday between three and four o'clock in the evening; 1 saw him out by the corner of tbe barn near Mr. Murray's house, riding along slowly by himself. , >- Q. At the time you saw Dr. Mudd, could you see the main road from where you were standing? A. I did not take auy notice of the main road; some one said '¦here comes a gentleman," and I went to the door and saw it was Dr. Mudd. Q. How much of the main road, could you see from where you were standing? A. About a quarter of a mile or more. ' CJ. Did you" see anybody on the main road? A. Idid nbt; if ti:ere had been anybody with him I could easily have seen the person. r By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham,— CJ. This was on Easter Saturday afternoon? A. Yes sir. Q. Dr. Mudd- was coming apparently from Bryan town? A. Y.essir. By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. Didyou see which way he was coming, whether he was coming irom Bryantown or not? A. No sir. Testimony of Primas Johnson (colored). Q.,Do you know the prisoner," Dr. Mudd? A. Yes Q. State when you saw him after the President's assassination? A. I saw him on the Saturday after- hoon afterwards, about three or half-past three o'clock. CJ. Bid you see him as he was going to Bryantown that day?' A.^Yes sir. CJ. Did you.see anything of a man ridirig along with him as be Was goirig to Bryantown? AJ Nosir; Master Sam. Mudd was' by himself; there was a man went along after he had gone on. CJ. Did yousee anything of tbat man who followed Master Sam. Mudd coming back? A. Yes sir; tbe same man that went in towards Bryantown came back by himself about an hour and a half, I reckon, before Master Sam. Mudd: ' Q. Where is Mr. Boose's house? A. I suppose it is a couple pf miles this side of Bryantown, on the road be tween Bryahtown and Dr. Sam. Mudd's. Testimony of Cnarles Bloyce. By Mr. Ewing— CJ. Do you know the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A.™Mudd? A. Yes sir. CJ. Wer&y ou< about his- house last year; and if &o, how often? A. T went there on tho 12th day after the ©l&ristmaa before last, and was about the house every Saturday and Sunday, except between1 the loth of April and the 20th of May, when I was hauIiDg seine. Q. Are you the husband- bf one of bis servants, who has been here as a witness? A . YeS sir. CJ. Have you ever seen Ben. Gwynn or Andrew Gwinn? A. Yessir, about four years ago, whehtfbe War first commenced, they passed along by Mr. Dyer's. Q. Didyou see-either of tihem about Dr. Mudd's house last year? A,- Nosir. Q. Did you-isee or hear siny thing of Watt Bowie, John ?- kurratt, Xapt. White, of Tennessee, Lieut. Perry, or J. Wilkes Booth? A. Nosir. ' Q\Neithersawnornearcl°f»nv of them about Dr. Mudd's house last year? A. Nosir. Q. Did you know of any Confederate officers or any men in uniform being about there last year? N. No. sir. Q. Do you know Mary Simms? A. Yes sir Q. Do you know what the colored folks about there think ofheras a truth-teller? A. The folks there said shewasnotmuchofa truth-teller; 'that she told such lies they could not believe her. CJ, What did they think about Mylo Simms? A They thought the same about hhn; I used to think myself that he was a liar, because heused to tellmeliessome- times. CJ. What was Dr. Mudd's character as a master of his servants? A. I would call him a first-rate man; I never heard of him whipping or saying anything to them: they did pretiymuch as theypleased. CJ. Didyou ever hear him threaten to send anyof his servants to Bichmbnd? A. No indeed, I never heard one of them say a word aboutit. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— CJ. Did you ever hear anything about bis shooting any ot his ser vants? A.. I did hear that. CJ. You thought that was first-rate fun? A. I don't know about tbat. (Daughter.) Testimony of Marcus I*. Norton. . Colonel Burnett stated tbatin the discretion of tbe Court this witness had been called to give testimony bearing more or less directly upon the prisoners, Dr. Mudd, Atzeroth and O'Laughlin. Itwasthe practice in Military Corirts. even alter tbe testimony had been closed on both sides, ior the Court to call and examine further witnesses if in their judgment necessary. If, however, the counsel for the delense wish to interpose an Objection, now was tbe proper time for them to do so. Mr. Cox stated that he should object, for the reason that it had once been distinctly announced that all evi dence on the part of, tbe .Government, except that strictly rebuttirig in its nature, was closed only so far asshould relate to the general subject ofthe conspi racy, and not affecting directly the case ofanyoneof the prisoners. Mr. Evvingsaid that so far as be was concerned he was willing that any further evidence should be intro duced, provided time was given for the defense to meet it. ' Cplonet Burnett replied thatit was for that very pur pose he had called the1 witness" now, Th e Court decided to receive the proposed evidence. B v Colonel Burnett.— CJ. Where do you reside? A. In, the city of Troy, N.Y. ' CJ. State where you were during the latter part of the winter and tbe spring ot this year. A. I was at the National Hotel, in this city, from, about the 10th of January until the 10th or middle of March. CJ. While there did you become acquainted with J, WJlkes Booth? A. Not personally acquainted: I knew him by sight; I had seen him act several times in the theatre. Q. While at the hotel state whether you saw any one with him? A. Therearethpsethatlrecognizeas hav ing Keen during that time in:'co'rapany with J. Wilkes Booth; rather, Ishould say I saw those two men with him. (Atzeroth and O'Laughlin). Q.- At what time? A.' 1 .do not, remember the exact day; it was near to the inauguration of President Lin- cblh; Atzeroth I saw' twice, arid the other one I sup pose four or five times. CJ. State whether at any, time you accidentally over heard any 'conversation between Booth or either of these parties, and if sp, what.it was?, A. I did with Atzeroth; I can't give the precise language, but the substance of It was that i f the matter succeeded as well with Johnson as it did with Buchanan, they would get terribly sold. Q, Did you hear any other conversation? A. There Was something said that the testimony of witnesses would be, of that character thatyvpry little could be proved by them; Booth's statements"! heard in the same conversation on the evening of either the 2d or 3d, of March last;. I,djd not know what was referred to. CJ. State now" which of the other prisoners you have seen before, and under what circumstances. A. I saw that one (Dr. Mudd) once, while I was at the National Hotel; hecahae to my room on the morning of the 3d of March entered hastily, and appeared to be some what excited; hesaid' he had made a mistake, that he wanted to see Bdoth; I told him Booth's room was Serbaps on the floor abovp; I did not' know the num- er;. from the apparently excited manner of, the per son entering my room I left my writing and wentout into the hall and followed him; he went downstairs, and as he reached the story below he turned aha looked-atme. - ' .; Q. Did or did not you, when you first entered the room this morning, recognize the prisoner, Mudd, as the person. you meton that occasion? A. I pointed him outtoH. Jones this morning,* the prisoner I now 130 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. see was the one. or it was a person exactly like him; I am satisfied he was the man. Q. Didyou ever see him afterwards? ^- Not before to-day. , . , , , :;.:'• Q. state what circumstances enable you to fix the date. A. I fix it from the fact of its prpximitvto tho in auguration; I think itwas about tenor eleven o'clock on themorning before. i CJ. Might it not have, been in the previous month of February? A.' I think the day I have named was the date. , Q.- Are you as certain about tbat as you are ofthe identity of tbeprisoner? A. lam. Cross-examined by Mr. Cox.-rCJ. Can youfixthedate of the conversation O'Laughlin had with Booth? A. I cannot.CJ. Was, any person in company with them while they wereconversing? A. Nosir. Q. Did you overbear anything said in any of these, conversations? A. No. Iwasnotnearenough,.- By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. Howdoyoufixthethh'dofMarch as the day Dr. Mudd entered your ,room? A. Only- frorii'the fact of tbe inauguration: I did not make any memorandum of it, or charge my mind particularly With the date; I recollect the morning Dr. Mudd en tered my room I had a motion pending in, theSupreme Court or'the United States for that day, and I was pre paring my papers. CJ. When did you argue themotion ? A. On that day. t CJ. What was the motion? A. It was to dismiss a certain patent case from, the Court for want of jnrisdip-i tion, in a case originating in the Northern District of New York. - . Q. How was he dressed? , A. That I could not say; his garments were black, a^nd'hehad a hat in bis hand; I do not know as I can give any name to the hat; it had-ji high crown, , CJ. Can you describe any other, article of d: ess? A. No, it was a hasty glance coming in and going out. CJ. Doyou recognizethe prisoner Mudd with asmuch' certainty in your own mind as ypu do the others? A. In my own mind I have no doubt as to either ofthe three. CJ. Do you recognize any of tjbe other prisoners at tbe bar? A. X do not knpw that' I ever saw any ofthe others before. , By Mr. Doster.— CJ. State if you can the precise date of the conversation between Atzeroth and Booth? A. J cannot; the place was in the office of the hotel and the time was early in the evening. , Q. How did you happen to htarthem? A. Iwasslt- tingina seat near them: in a hrtel. we sometimes overhear parties, even when talking with others. Q. Were they talking in a loud or low tone of voice? A. They were not talking ina very loud tone of voice. Q. How near were you. to them? A- Within two or three feet. CJ. Was the prisoner dressed then as he is now? A. I should think hot; I did.not take particular notice, how ever; Ipasspd if as Ido a, thousand other things. CJ. You do riot recognize him. then, by bis aress ? A No; by his appearhnce; I do not know as he had so much of a scowl upon his lace then as now. CJ. Was he as fleshy then as now? A. I could not say as to. that; I did not take his dimensions as to his avoirdupois weight. CJ. You say you have not seen Atzeroth since then until to-day;, about two months ago?- A. About tbat. Cj: Have yqu repeated that conversation from that time until to-day? A. I spoke to Mr. King about it pnce. CJ. Are you in the habit of remembering conversa tions you overhear casually for two months? A. I remember some tbjngs a long time. CJ. Are you in tlie habit of remembering faces for that time? A, I d6 sometimes. Q. And you can swear to that precise conversation? A. I have only undertaken to repeat the substance of it. Q. Are you a lawyer? A. I am. CJ. And have you read the testimony in this case? A. Not generally at all; I have read the examination of two or three witnesses. By Mr. Coxe.—Q. Were tbe conversations vou saw between Booth and O'Laughlin in the public hall? A. They were; I heard nonrfof them. By the Court.— CJ. What is the character of your eve- alght? A. I am somewhat near-sighted; I always wear glasses. . CJ. Do you. have perfept confidence In recognizing people's countenances? A. 1 would at the distance I saw these men. Q. What was the impression created by this man who caihe into your room that led you to follow him? A. It was bis hasty entrance and hasty exit. CJ. Did be seem embarrassed or mistaken when he entered the roorn? A. He^eemed somewhat excited, and apqlogized by saying he had .made a mistake. Q, Had you occupied ibat room preyious to that day? A. I had been changed Into that room perhaps ten days previously. ' Cross- Examination of I/. 8. Roby. By' Mr. Ewlng.-CJ. state where you live. A. In Charles county, Maryland. , CJ. Were you in Bryantown on the day after the assassination ofthe President? A* I was on tbe even ing oFthat day; I arrived there at three o'clock, I CJ. State what you heard'about- the .assassination of the President! A. We heard. before getting there of the fact, but I did not believe it; when we. got near there, however, I found soldiers stationed along the road,andIJnquiredof them and they said it was a fact; I made inquiry as to who was -the perpetrator; they said itwas somebody who belonged to the theatre? they did notgive the name, andspoke as'thougb,tbey did notknow: I had conversation witb several; there was a great deal ofconfusloni tout before I lelt I heard it was Booth, from Dr. George Mudd. Q. Were you about Bean's store during the time you was there? A. Ipassedut.butdidnotgoiu. CJ. State whether you are acquainted with D. J. Thomas, who has been a witness for the prosecution ? A.~% am- '-" 'i Q. Doyouknowhlsreputationin tbe neighborhood in which Jie laves,- for veracity ? A. It is bad..' Q.JTrom vour knowledge of his reputation .for. yce the war? A. All tbe time; he seems lb be a kind of man who will imagine things that are not true, and get to believe they'afre facts, and stick to them all the' lime. By Judge Bingbam.— CJ. You do not mean to say that he would tell #hat he did not believe to be true? A. No, but he would tell things/not true, although he, believed them himself to be true. Testimony of E. E>. R. Bean. By Mr Ewing.— CJ, State your occupation? A. I am a merchant ati Bryantowp. CJ. State whether the prisoner, Dr. Mudd, made any purchases.of you the day .after the assassination oj the, President?, A. 1 think 1 sold him soine calico; I only remember the day from some circumstances thai fixed i t, in my mind. , CJ. State what you heard that dav in Bryantown as to the assassination of the President? A. I heard that day 'that the President was assassinated; I asked by whom, and I understood it tone a man ofthe name of Boyle, who was said "to have murdered Captain Watkins. , Q. Did you on tbat day hear that it was Booth who assassinated the President? A. I Gannot particularly say; my impression is that I did pop on tbat'day. CJ. Werethpre soldiers in and out of your store that day, and citizens? A. Yes, and. the subject of the as-r sassination was the general topic of conversation. CJ. State whether you had any conversation with the prisouer, Dr. Mudd,.abou,t tbeassassination? A. The day I sold him the calico I had some discussion with; him on that subject; I remarked to him it was bad news,., ; Judge Bingham— It is not. competent for the witness to state that conversation., , '.,,-* Mr. Ewing said he was aware that similanquestionji had been overruled, but still.believing the question was u proper one, he desired to have it entered and the dot cjsioii ot the Court upon h . The objection wiw sustained by the Court. CJ. It was the conversation you had witb. Dr. Mudd TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 131 that enabled you, to fix the date when you sold the cali> co.was.it? A. Yessir. Cross-examined by Judge Bingham.— Q. When did ypu learn that Booth was the man who had murdered president Lincoln? A. Really I do not remember the Q. Then you do not know that it was not on Easter Saturday, do you? A. I do not. Q. Did you hear, at the same time, tbat the man who had murdered the President had been traced to within Shree miles of Bryantown? A. I do not'know whether DWits at the same time; I beard some time that he. was traced to within three or three and a half miles of that place. CJ. Can you tell how you heard it? A. I do not know; it was in general conversation, CJ. Didyou connect the sale of the* eft-lie© with that fact, as well as the killing of tha President by Booth? A. I did not; X think I did, not hear of tbat fact. 0,Q. How do you know it was on Monday? A. Ido not know. ',Q, And you cannot positively state that it was not on Saturday? A. No sir. ' By Mr. Ewing. —CJ. But your Impression is that you did not hear it on Saturday? A. My impression is. that (did not. Testimony of John R. Giles. By Mr. Cox.— CJ, Where do you reside? A. At Bull- man's Hotel, Pennsylvania avenue, Washington. , CJ. Do you know the accused, Michael O'Laughlin? A. Yes, 1 have known him personally for. about four months-' Q. Didyou see him op the Thursday before the as sassination ofthe President? A., I saw him in the evening: he was with a Mr. Murphy, witb Lieutenant Henderson , Purdy and several others. . Q. Where was it? A. It was at our place, two doors from the-Globe office; I saw bim early in the evening, and then later, about ten o'clock, and they remained fill alter eleven o'clock. ¦CJ. Bid yonjoin them when they went out? A. Idid, and was with them till one o'clock. CJ. Did you see them on Friday evening, the evening 0[C ttLeassassination? A. Idid; I was with them all ihe evening. O,, "Vv as O'Laughlin at your hotel at the time thenews ox the assassination of the President was received? A. yes, he was; I should think itwas about half-past nine orten.o'clocft;. CJ. Your house is owned by aman by the name of, LiQhauj is it not? A. Yes. CJ*. Is-it the house known as the Lichau House? A. No; the Lichau Houseus on Louisiana avenue.be- tweeu Fifth and Sixth streets, near Canterbury Music Hall. Cross-examined by Judge Bingham*— Q- You think the npwSiOf the President's murder came along about halfrpastnineorten o'clock? A.Ithinkso; Iconldnot tell certainly; I did not look at the clock. Re-Cross-Examinatdon of Ma*. Reed. By Mr. Aiken.— CJ. Are you acquainted with John H. Surratt? a. I know him by sight. ' CJ. State the time you saw. him Jast. A. I saw him about haif-pasttwo o'clock on the day of the assassi nation, the nth 'qf April., " ''Q.'Did you ever have ariy conversation with him? A. I can not say that I have since I was quite a boy; he has-been merely a^peaking acquaintance. Q- Where were you when you saw him? A. I was standing on the stoop of Hunt & Goodwin's military stbre^ , CJ/^tate how his hair was cut. A, It was cut very Singularly: itwas rounded down, and fell on his coat cqllar behind. . , „ , _ . CJ, Did he have a moustache or whiskers? A. I do not know that he had; in fact, Idid not look at his face, particularly, at all. ., , „ CJ. Look at that picture of John H. Surratt, and see If you recognize it? A. It is very much like the clothing, but it isnot the style of hair be had when I saw him. Bv Judge Bingham.— CJ. That is the pipture of John H, Surratt, is it not? A. Yes, it is a fair picture ofhim, tbough his hair is not cut as it was when I saw him on $hel4tb of April. Testimony of Miss Anna "Ward. By Mr. Aiken.— Q. State your residence. A. In. Washington city. Q. Are ^ou acquainted with the prisoner, Mrs. Sur ratt? A. Yes, I have known hex tor seven or eight years. . .... CJ, Have ypu ever know,n her on any occasion fan to Recognize yOu or her friends when you have met her? A. She failed to recognise me once when I met her on the street; I had also failed to recognize-her; she made an apology to mo and I naadethe same apology toher. CJ. Are you near-sighted? A.' I am; this was on Seventh street; Mrs. Surratt's daughter was with her, andcalled her attention to the fact that she had not Bpdkeri to me. i . , ., .. , CJ. Did vou ever have occasion at any time to read for ber" "A Yes, I gave her a lptter to read: she re turned it tome, and ar.kcd rae to read it, saying she could not see to read by gas light. Q. Do you recollect any other occasion when she failed to recognize persons? A- 3£ do not know that I do. Q, Did you receive a letter from John H. Surratt not long since? A. Idid. Q. Where is that letter? A- I gave it to his mother; I presume ithas been destroyed. Q. Please state to the Court, as well as you can re»i collect, all the cireumBtanees of John H. Surratt'a affair with you In engaging a room at the Herndon House. A. He called one afternoon and asked to see (me. Judge Bingham- You need .not state that conversa tion. Mr. Aiken. Very well, then, we turn the witness over to you. Perhaps you may want to mak&some in quiries yourself about that matter. Cross-examined by Judce Bi ngham.— CJ. Haye ypu been in the habit of visiting often at Mrs. Surratt's? A. Occasionally, up to the:dayof the assasination; thatt was the last day I vlsi Led her. CJ. Onalltbe.occasions when you went to the house, 6Md she recoghizeyou without difficulty? A. Yes; once or twicesheopenedthe^door for me; at other times I sent my name up. Q. She was quick to recognize the voice, wasn't she? A.. Yesj CJ, You are acquainted with John H. Surratt? A„ Yes. Q: Did you go with him or go alone to the Herndon House to obtain a room? A. Ididnot obtain a room, I simply wentthere to ascertain: if there was a vacant room. CJ. When^was that? A. I do not know; It was a long time ago. ' CJ. was it prsbably thelast of February or perhaps of March? A. It may have been. CJv You wentthere to obtain a room for a delicate gentleman, did you not? A. I did not Know what person. CJ. Have you met any ofthe prisoners at thebar? A- I can't see them well enough to answer; I do not think I have. Q. Did you. meet any strangers at Mrs. Surratt's house? A. I met Booth there, and I met two gentle men who boarded there. CJi. You got a -letter from John H. Surrattr postmarked Montreal, Canada East? A. Yes. CJ. When did you;receiveit? A. I received two from him; the first on the day ofthe assassination: I do not recollect the date ofthe second; therewas a. very short interval between them. ¦ CJ. You delivered ..both of these letters to Mrs. Sur* ratt? A. I delivered one to her, and the other to her daughter Anna. CJ. Have you seen it since? A. No. CJ. Did you answer any letters received from, him? A. Neither of these; he wrote me two letters atthe: same time, inclosingthe letters for his mother; I an- Bwered those addressed to me. CJ And all were about the time ofthe President's as sassination? A. I do not recollect when; they wera all alter he left home, and I think very soon after the President's assassination. CJ. You haven't got any of them? A. Nosir. Q. Do you know whether, the. letters to yourself have been destroyed? A. I do not; I left them with his mother, and have not inquired for them since. CJ. You asked for a room to rent at the Herndon House for a man? A. I did not; I simply asked for some rooms. . ^ J.. „ . „ Cj. Who was, with y°u at tnat time? A. No one; I was- alone, on my way to the Post Office, By Mr. Aiken.— CJ. Have you known Mrs. Surratt as a lady always attentive to her duties? A. I have. CJ. Do you know anything as to her general charac ter? A.'My knowledge of her has always been that of a Christian and a lady. By the Court. Q. Doyou attend the same church as Mrs. Surratt? A. I do, sir. Testimony of Mr. Gessford. By Mr. Ewmg. CJ. State in what business , yon were employed on the 14th of April last? A. I was ticket- seller at Ford'stheatre. CJ. How long were you at the ticket office during the day or night? A. My business at the ticketoffice com^ menced ahonthaU-pastsix in the evening. Q. State whether or not the private boxes, except those occupied by the party ot the President, were ap plied for that evening? A. Nosir. Q. State whether or not any tickets to those boxes had been sold during the day? A. I think not. No further witnesses far the defense being in attend ance, Mr. Doster made application for a personal ex-r amination to be inadeof tbe prisoner Payne byDr, Nichols. Superintendent of the Government Institu tion ior thelnsane, for thepurposeof testingthe sanity of tbeprisoner. , The application was granted. Mr Doster also requested that the testimony for the defense be not considered as closed until George Powell the father of Payne, and other witnesses, who had been summoned from. Florida, who would testify in respdct to Payne's antecedents and the tendency on the part of thelamily, to insanity, should be present. 132 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS lT; WASHINGTON. ' Judge Bingham. Then are we to regard that as, an au thentic statemeut that the prisoner's name is Powell? Mr. Doster.— I haye stated that his father's name is Powell, and I take itffor granted ttie inference will be drawn that that is the name of tbeprisoner. ColonPl^Burnett stated that a reasonable time would beallowedforthe defense to meet the new evidence introduced by the Government to-day. Further^than that he hoped there would be-'no pbstponeinent. The President of the Court said that a.mpie time had been allowed to obtain witnesses for th'e! ¦defense, and that the request of Mr. Doster would not be granted. -'Th&Court then;a6^ouMed until Monday at 10 o'clock A.M. t *» : i . ; '__ • '£__ ; Tne Suppressed Testimony. The following testimony in secret session, of. the Court has been obligingly famished for publication. That of Sanford Conover has heretofore been surrepti tiously printed in a mutilated form, and hence the ne cessity of now publishing it-entire.:— Testimony of RicBiard Montgomery. Richard Montgomery, a witness called for the prose cution, being duly swbrn, testified as follows:— By the Judge .Advocate.— CJ, Are you a citizen, of New' York? A. Yessir. . • CJ. State whether or not you visited Canada in the gammer of 1804. A,, I did. CJ. How long did you remain there? A. I remained there, going back .and forth, ever since, until within about a week and a half or -two weeks' time. "Q:> Did you or not 'know in Washington City, Jacob Thompson; formerly Secretary of tbe Interior, and Clement C, Clay, formerly of tbe United States Senate? Ai. I'did.- < : ." ..'.--.- j CJ. Willyoustatewhetheryoumet those personsin Canada and where? A. I met them in Canada. atNia- f;ara'Fa»Hs, at.Toronto; at St. Catharine's, 'and'at Mon- real a number of times, and very frequently since the summer of l8G4upto this time. ' CJ. Did you or not. meet George N. Sanders?- AvI did. CJ. And aman by the name of J. p. Holcomb? A. Yes sir, Proiessor Holcomb. > •* : lt CJ. Can you name 'any -other 'Rebel' citizens of the United States in Canada, of note, tbat you met? A. Yes sir, I met Beverly > Tucker, N. ¦ C, Cleary (I think- those are the initials)" and a great many others under fictitious names;" thera- was another one by t/he*nameof Harrington; those are " Kb© ones that I principally had communication with; I mot another one -by the name of Clay, not Clement G. Clay: I met one* Hicks up there also. CJ. Under how many dMerent names did Jacob Thompson pass- in Canada, do you know? A. It would be impossible lor me to tell you? I knew him under three or' four* and others knew him under other names; his principal name was Carson1. CJ. Do you know under wbat name Clement C. Clay passed? A. Yessir; one of them, was, Hope: another, T. E. Lacy; I have forgotten tbe initials Of 'bis name as Hope: T; 15. Lacy was : the4 principal1 one: another due was Tracy. ¦ ' ' « ¦ CJ. State any conversation you -may have had- with Jacob Thompson In Canada, In the summer of 1864, in regard to putting 'the President; Of the United StatPs out ofthe way, or assassinating him. A. During a conversation in 18(54. Jacob Thompson said to me tnat hehad his friends!(Confederates)all over theNorthern- States, who were ready and willing to go any length for the good o if. the cause of the South, and he could at any time have the tyrant Lincoln, and any others of his advisers -til at he chose.'put out of his way; that he would but have to point out the man-that he consid ered in hia way and, his .friends, as he termed them, would putTiim out Of Jit', and not let him know any thing ahout it if npcessary; and that they would not consider it a crime when. 'done for the cause of the Confederacy. ' ' >¦¦'¦•- CJ. Didyou or not see Thompson some time In the month of January, 18G5, and Where ? A. That was in Canada, in Montreal. Q. Will you state what he then said to you, if any- thltig, In regard to a proposltiori which had been madetohim tOridthe World of the tyrant Lincoln? A. He said a proposition had been made to him to rid the world of tlie tyrant Lincoln, Stanton, Grant, and some others; that he knew the men who had niaae the proposition were bold, daring men, and able to exe cute anything that they "would undertake without regard to the' cost; that he, himself, was in flwor or the proposition, but had determined to defer Kia'&f&BWer Until he had Consulted his Government at Bichmond, and that he was then only awaiting their approval; he said that' ho thought It would be a bless ing to the people, both Northand South, to have those men killed: CJ, This was in January? A. That was In January last. ' ' Q. What time In the month was It? A. It wo» about the middteof tbe month; I saw him a number of times) I could npt give the exact day ofthat conversation; Q -Was it about that time' that ybtl saw Clement C. Clav and had a conversation With him? A. . No Sn<: in thSummer of 1864, immediately -after Mr Thompson had told me what he was able to dp, I repeated the con- versation to Mr. Clay, arid he said "that is so; we are all devoted to our cause, and ready to go any length, to do anything under the sun," 'was his expression, I remember, "to serve their cause. ' ' ¦ - .»''_, - ci. Look at those prisoners at the bar, and see if yott recPgfiize any of ! them as having been seen by you in Canada-, ka& under whatclrcumBtances. •; A. I have seen that one witbout.his*coat, there (pointing to Lewis Payne, one of the aceosed);Taon't know his namfe. u. Will you state when, and under what circum stances1 vou 'saw him? A: I have' seen him a number of times" in Canada; I saw him about the Falls in the summer of 1864, and I saw Ojlm. again, I guess itwas tneLlasttime. and had some words with mm, at the Queen's Hotel, at Toronto City. Canada West. ' ¦ ' Q. State 'alf that occurred at tbat time: A. I had had an interview of some time with- Mr. Thompson; several others hadsougMTan interview while I was closeted with him, and- had 'been refused admittance? alter I was through with Mr. Thompson, and- hi leaving the room ,- i saw. this man, Payne, in the pas sage waV, near his door"; Mr. qiement C. Clay, Jr., was talking' with' 'biriV'&lf the time; Mr. Clay stopped rne and held my hands, finishing a converse tiOn in an' undertone with this man, ana when he left me for a hiomeht he said "wait for me, I will return;'1 he then went and spoke to some other gentlemen -who' were entering Mr. Thompson's door, and he came back and bid me gPod-bye, asking me where he could' see me'in half an hour, and I toM him, and made an. appointment tp meet Mr. Clay; while Mr. Clay was away from- me I spoke to this man, and asked him who he was; I commenced talking about some of the topics that were the usual topics' of conversation among the men there, and he rather hesitated telling; who he was; he (Paylie) said', '-Oh. I am a Canadian;" giving me to understand that I was not to ask any more^ L ;i ' ¦ '- ¦Q. Did you not ask Thompson or Clav who he was?' A. Yes sir, I made spme mention in regard- to this' man to Mr. Clay.intheidterview I had with him, about half an hour alter I saw him' standing in *1"- way. and he said. "Wbat did he say?" said half an hour alter I saw him' standing in the Tassage- way. and be said. "Wbat did he say?" saicLI, "HP saitf he was a Canadian;" and he said, "Thafis so, lie is s Canadian,"1 andlafagfiefi. CJ. Did he say he was one of tbeir friends, or make any remark ofthat sort? -.A. Hesaid, "Wetrnst him." CJ. What was the ideb. cob veyed by the term "Cana dian" with his lau^hT A. That 'was a very common expression among the friends of theirs ihat were in the) habit'of visitibgtne'States.andgave trie to understand that I was not to ask any more questions; that their intercourse was ot a very confidential nature, and that their business was of a very confidential nature. CJ. Haveyou^beentQ- Canada since -the assassination of thePresident? A. Yessir.' , , •Q,. StatewhetheryOumetanyof tbesemenof whom, you have spqken on yburreturn to Canada, and if Boy what conversatiori you had with them there in regard to the assassiha'tioh'^ftbePresiderit? A. I met Bever1- ly Tucker, a very few days after the ' assassination, three or four or five'tlrhes? ; Q. Where? A. At-Mohtreal. Q. What conversation had you? A. Hesaid a great deal in conversation about the wrongs that tbe South bad received fronitfaehands of Mr. Lincoln, and that' he deserved his death long ago;, that it was a pity that he'did not have itlong'ago, arid that it was too bad -the boys had hot been allowed to act as they wanted, to. CJ. Do you mean by the boys the men who were to' asfeassmatebim? A. Yessir, the Confederate soldiers who' were1 up there, who had beeri engaged. Sn their raids; they used the.expresssion "lheirboys"m regard to their Soldiers and the men in their employ; it is comrnon among' them. ' • Q'. Did you meet wjth Booth there? A. No sir, I never saw Mr. Booth in Canada. CJ. Did any of those men of whom yoii have spoken say that' Booth was one' of the men referred to by i Jacob Thompson who was willing to assassinate the President? A. Yes? sir; ;W: H. Cleary told mfei I re lated to him the conversation I had had, or a portion of it, -with Mr. Thompsbn in January, arid he said that Booth was one of the parties to whom Thompson' had reference. - ''CJ. Did' hie say in that connection anything further In regard to him? A. No sir: he said in regard to the as- sasination that if was, too bad that the whOlework had not been done. ' CJ. What did you understand by that expression, "the whole work?" A. I inferred that1 tbey intended to as- sassibate a greater number than they succeeded jta trying to. Q. Do you know what relation thra man Cleary sus tained to Thompson ? A. Mr. Holcomb told ihe I would find Mr. Cleary to be tho confidential, a'sort of secretary to Mr. Thompson; Mr. Thompson told rhe he was posted upon all of his affairs, and that If I sought him-a'tany time that he might bo away I could, state my business to Mr. Cleary, and it would bo all the TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 133 same; that I could have perfect confidence in him, that he was a very close-mouthed man. ' ' M$.--Bid Cleary make any remork when speaking of his regret tbat .the whole work had not been done: was any threat mad© to the effect that it would be yet tone? A. Yes sir; he said they had- better look out; we are not done yet, and remarked that they never would give up.' >' ¦.,,¦¦' CJ. What statement did Cleary make to you, if any, toxegard;to Booth's having visited Thompson?. A. He Said that he had been there twice in tbe winter; that he thought; the last time was in December; hehad also been there in the summer; he said he had been there beiore December; he thought that that was the last time. t CJ. On your return to Canada did you learn from these parties that they supposed themselves to be sus pected of the assassination, audwere they tailing any steps to conceal the evidence of their guilt? A. Oh yes sir; they knew a very few days after the assassination that they were fenspecled of it; Tucker and Cleary both said they were destroying their papers. CJ. Have-you stated what Tucker said to you when you.had.an interview with him after you returned? A. He said it was too bad that they had not beenal- lowed-to act wheri they wanted to. CJ. {Submitting to witness a paper containing a secret cinher.)Will you look at this and state if you. are fa miliar with the cipher used by the Confederate au thorities? A. I am familiar with two of them; tbe Saper containing the cipher Was hero offered in evi- ence. - Qj. Have you not also been the bearer of despatches for these persons? A. Yes- sir; I was intrusted with despatches tocarry from Canada td- Richmond; Q'. Did you carry them ? A. I carried some to Gor- donsville with, instructions that I was to send them from there. CJ. Did you receive despatches in reply? A. Once I did. Q. Were they carried back? ¦ A. Yes sir, they were carried back. CJ. Didyou come through Washington; did you make (them known to the Government? A. Yes sir; each time I delivered the despatches, always to the Go vernment of tho United; States; I passed nothing that I took) except by their permission l JJ. Brom whomiwere the despatches received at Gor- donsville received? A. A gentleman who represented himself tome as being in theiri State Department, and sent with the answer bytheir Secretary of State. CJ. And youboretbedespatobieatowhom; to Thomp son or Clay? A. I borp.ifc back to Mr. Thompson. ¦ CJ. AlLof these men, Thompson, Clay an'd Cleary, represented themselves as being in the service of the Confederate Government? A. Yessir. ' ¦ CJ. When was it that you received that despatch at Qordonsville? A. Itwas insthe fall, I believe; it was in October. i- ,CJ. Didyou ever hear the subject of tbese raids from Canada upon our frontier, and of the burning of our cities spofien of among these conspirators? A, Yes sir, ©sany times. _ " L_ ¦ " ' _i ' - ' CJ. By Thompson, Clay, Cleary, Tucker, Sanders,1 and those men?- A. 'Yes sir; I know that Mr. Clay was bno ofthe prime movers in the matter-before the raids were started. , , , ,, , ' Q. You understood in your conversations with them that all these men fully approved of these enterprises? A. Yessir^ they received the direct indorsement of Mr. Clement C, Clay, Jr.; he represented himsel f to me as being) a sort of representative of the War Depart ment. CJ. Do you not consider thatyou enjoyed fully the confidence of those men, so that they freely communi cated to you? A. I do; Ido not think they would have intrusted those despatches to me unless they had the fullest confidence in me. Q. Did' they or not, at all times represent themselves as acting under the sanction of their Government at Bichmond? A.< They irepresented themselves as hav ing fullpower to act/without reference totLem; they re peatedly told me; both Mr. Clay and Thompson, "tbat they had full power to act by their Government in anything tbey deemed expedient,. and for the benefit of theircause. Q. .Were you in Canada at the time, the attempt was made1 to fire the city of New York? A. .Yes sir. ' CJ. Was that the subject ot much conversation among these people? A.' I left Canada with the news two days before the attempt was made to bring it to the Departments Washington.., CJ. That such a project was contemplated? A. Yes sir. i ¦ ¦ ¦ CJ. You knew that it originated there and had the lull sanction of tbese men? A. Yessir. CJ. Doyou mean to say the same in regard to the St. Albans raid? A. Yessir; Idid not know the point where that raid was to be madej but I told the Govern ment at Washington that they were about to set out on a raid of that kind before the St. < Albans raid: I also told them ofthe intended raid upon Buffalo and Rochester, and by that means prevented those raids: Q. Captain Beale, who was subsequently : hanged at New-York, was known there as leacting in this enter prise, was he not ? A. I did not know him by tbat name. , < CJ. Was he spoken of among those men ? A. I never heard him spoken ,oi; they were in tbe habit of using theLr»fictitious name in conversation with each other* CJ. You say thatyou do not know anything about Beale? At No&irjTknew that the objeGtof hismission was contemplated;! did not know who .were to be the immediate executors of the plot; I knew of the plan at the time, and reported it. i > CJ. Did you hear the subject of the funds by which all these eeterprises were carried on spoken of ¦ among these conspirators- as to who had tho funds, or tbe amount they had. or auything ofthat sort? A. Yes sir; in regard to the raiding Mr. Qlay had funds. Q. Did you ever hear the probable amount spoken of by anyof them? A. No sir;, he represented to me that he always had plenty of money to pay for anything that was worth paying for; hetold-mehe had money. CJ. Doyou kriow in what bank in Montreal these Be bels keep tbeir account and funds? A. No sir, I dp not. Q. You know that there was a Bank of Ontario in Montreal? A. Yes sir; I know that there is such a bank^Ikriow that they deposited in several different banks; they transacted a good deal of business, in what I think is called tlie Niagara- District Bank; it is almost Opposite Where Mr. Clay's residence was in St. Cathe rine's; during the summer they transacted a great deal of business *at thatbank, CJ.' Wbat seemed to be George N. Sanders' position there if hehad adefined position? A. Mr. Clay tpld me'thatlhad better nOttefl him the things' that I was bent uDon nor the things that they Intrusted tome; that h~e was a very good man to do their dirty work; that is iust what Mi-. Clay told me. ' ' Q. He was then doing their work, but it was dirty work? A. Mr. Clay said he associated with men tbat they could not associate with; that he was very useful in that wayi% very useful'mari to them indeed: ¦ Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— CJ. Where areyou from? A. New YorK city originally. Q. What time in the year was it tbat you said Mr. Thompson 'told you a proposition had been made to him? A. In the earty part ofthe year. Q. In January? A'. In January. Q. You stated, I think,, that immediately after that you saw Mr. Clay? a. No sir, I did riot. Q. When did you see Mr. Clay? A. Immediately after the conversation in the summer. . Q. The- Summer of 1864? A. Yes sir. in which he spoke pt "Thompson" being able to put the President out of the way whenever he was ready. ft. Did- you ever 'hear anything in Canada or Mr. Surratt as- being connected witb the plot? A. Idid Cj! Did you receive any pay' from the Confederate Government for goingtoGordonsviile with despatches? A. I received for the services, tq -defray railroad ex penses, the equivalent of one hundred-hnd fifty dollars in greenbacks; it was not one hundred and fiity dollars in greenbacks; it was, I bave forgotten the amount, in Canada rirohey;'gold was about 260 at the time; I have forgotteri what itwas; I received thatand reported the fact 'of having received it to the War Department at 134 TRTAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Washington, and iapplled it? on- my expense account as having been received from the Government. CJ. On your return with the- Gordonsviiihid'eBpatcbes for'theBebels in Canada did you, leave acopy of those despatches here? A. I handed theoriginal despatches over to the authorities,, and those of frbemthattbey selected to go ahead I carried on,< and those: they did not they retained. By the Court.— Q.i I want tot ask anl explanation of an answer you made, I understood you in your testi mony to say that after the assassination of the Presi dent some of those who- had been engaged in it bad returned to Canada, and you said they expressed re gret that they had nofcbeeai allowed toproceedearlier? A. You misunderstood me: Ididnot say tbatany of those who had been engaged in the attempt at assassi nation or in the assassination hadreturned to Canada. . CJ: But those who directed it from Canada expressed regret that thev had not been allowed to proceed sOonetf? A. One ofthe parties, the one who repre sented himself as being a commercial agent, Mr. Bev erly Tncker,said tnat it Wasapity thatsthe boys had not been allowed to act when they first wanted to. CJ; Did you understand why i they were prevented in not proceeding sooner? A. I did' not; I inferred, though, froin what Ihad heard from Mr. Thompson beiore, that he had detained them in order that he might choose a fitting opportunity. ¦ CJ. Your impression was that they were detained up to that time by Mr. 'Jacob Thompson? A. X inferred so because when he spoke of the matter to mein bis conversation ot January, 1865, .he said he was in lavor ofthe proposition that had been made to him to put the President, Mr. Stanton, Geuer-al Grant* and others out ofthe way, but had deferred giving his answer until he had consulted his-- Government at Bichmond, and was then only waitingtheir approval. CJ. Did you understand thathe had received the an swer, and given the direction following that? A. I never understood so; I never asked the question or re ceived that renly.' ¦ • " CJ. What was your impression? A. My impression was thiathe had received the answer; I inferred that he bad received that approval; and that they had been detained waiting for that, from what Beverly Tucker said. > - CJ. I understood you to mention the name of Prof. Holcbmb in connection with that of Sanders, Clay. and others. I would, like to know how far you can Identify him in tbese movements, plans, and. opera tions of these men? A. I made a proposition to Mr. Clay to carry despatches for them, and to do their work, as a means' of getting into their confidence. And. Mr. Cleary told me before Mr. Holcomb that he had authority to sign his (Clay's) name bypowerof attorney, and his own. both of tbem being representa tives ot the Confederate ¦ States Government, as they called it. Testimony off James B. Merriftft. James B, Merritt, a witness called, for the prosecu tion, being duly sworn, testified as follows:— By the Judge Advocate— CJ- Ofwbat State areyoua naLive? I do not know whether I am a native of New York or Canada, but have always hailed from JJiew York. \ CJ. What is your profession? A. Physician. ¦CJ. Have you been residing or not for some time in Canada and ifsd,;in wftatpart.of Canada? A. Ihave been in Canada about a yearor nearly a year; partof thetimeat Windsor, part of, the time at NorthDum-! fries, Waterloo county. i - CJ. Were you or not in the month of October or No- , vember last in Toronto,, Canada,? A,. J was,, CJ. State whether you met there a man by the, name of Young. A. I met George Young there, CJ. Did Young profess io.qe from Kentucky? A. I believe that .he did; I believe he was fornierly of Mor gan's command, Kentucky, Q. Did you meet a map named Ford, also of Ken tucky, adcsprter ? a. Yessir. Q. Didyou meet a man named Graves, from Louis ville? A. Yessir. ,CJ. Did you have any cpnversation with Youngin re gard to public affairs, of that time? A. Yes sir, some. : CJ. Will you state "what he said to you, if anvthing, in ' regard to some very important matters being on thei tapisinthe interest of the 'Rebellion? A. He asked! mo if I had seen Colonel Steele before I left Wipdsor. CJ. Who was Colonel Steele? A. Colonel Steele, I be lieve, is a Kentuckian; what his given nameis I dp not know. CJ. Was be a Bebel, in the Rebel service? A. He had been, as I understood, a Rebel, in the service. Q. Proceedwith what Young tpjd you? A. He asked me if Colonel Steele had said anythingto me.in rela tion to the. Presidential election.. I .told him that he had not. Then he said we have something on the tapis of much more importance than any raid that we have made or can make, or something of that char acter, Q. Did he proceed to state what it was? A. I asked him whfltitwas; hesaid itwas deterniined,that "old, Abe" BhOUia n,ever be inaugurated: if I understood right that was his expression; I asked him, how he knew; lie said he knew that, ho would not be Inaugura ted'; thev hadplenlby of friends, I think he said in Washj ington.'and he spoke in relation to Mr Lincoln, and used some ungeritlemanly words; called him a -<— old tyrant, or s'omethimg like that, _ CJ. That was Young^ A. Yes sir. , ¦ Q. Did you afterwards see Steele and Sanders toger tbQ.r You' metn^GeorN. Sanders? A I do; I was in, traduced to Geo. N.Sanders by Colonel Steele. Q Will vou state what, if anything, wassaid in re-. lationtothe same matter by either ot them on thati occasion? A. I asked Colonel Steele swbat was going to be done, or how he liked tbeprospects ot tha Presi dential election; Colonel, Steele's expression was, * the old tyrant never will serve another term it he is elected;" Mr. Sailders saidvhe would have to. keep himselif very close it; he- did,searv,e another term." Q; Did Sanders say that atthe same time that Steels said the — old tyrant never should serve another term? A. Yes sin - . q. Were you afterwards In Montreal, in the -month of February last? A. Iwasj CJ. Was that letter read openly in this meeting by Sanders? A. Yessir. CJ. After it was read was it or not handed to mem bers of the meeting and read by them, one alter an other? A. Col. Steele read it, I think; Capt; Scott read it, and Young.andHill. CJ,- These were all known as Bebels. were they not? A- Iibelievethey were. Q. Did- they or i not all acquiesce, after ready ing it, in the correctness* with which Sanders had vSstd itopenfy to. the meeting? A. There was no remQrk made as to any misstatement of the letter by Sandterd, CJ. As far as you could judge did itseem to be since that meetiDg that it was proper to have this object accomplished?' A. I did hot hear any objection raised, ' ,,-CJ. You said that was in tbe month of February; can you say at what time of the month that meeting was held? A. Isbouldthinkit was somewhere about tbe middle of February. ' CJ. By whpm were you invited to attend the meeting? A. Captain Scott invited mo toattend themeetingi '' Q. Wasitonthat ocoasionor on some other that Sanders named over the persons who were waiting tb accomplish this assassination. A. At that time. CJ. Will you state whether among the persons thus named John WilkesBooth was mentioned? Aj Booth's name was mentioned; I do not remember that the John Wilkes was added to it. CJ. Did you see Booth yourself in Canada? A. Not then; I saw Booth in October, 1864. . Q. Can you recall now other names that were men tioned besides Booth's? A. Yes sir; George Harper was one, Charles Caldwell, one Randall arid Harrison. CJ., D'd you hear that person. Harrison, spoken oflby any other name? Did you hear the name SurraH mentioned ? A. I heard Surratt's name mentioned. CJ. Do you know whetbajiit was the same person ot not? A. Idonotthink itwaf. CJ. His name is John Harrison Surratt. A. Surratt's name wasmentionPliv > CJ. Did you see the ^prisoner., Har-old; in Canada, at that time? A. I say I saw Harold; I saw the one who was ealled Harrison, in Toronto. CJ , Wou'.dyou recognize him? look at these prisoners, and see if you recognize him. A. After looking at the TRIAL 0? TUB': ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 135 prisoners, I shouloUhlnk that third one on, the. bench there was the man (pointing to Harold). ' Q. Hewas spoken of as one who wasr^ady to accom plish assassination? A. I understood Mr. Sandprs to say he was ready to ncrohaplish it. or assist in it; his name was mentioned in connection with others, by mhers; he went there by the name of Harrison. Q. Look at the remainder of the prisoners a,nd see if you recognize any of them. Do vou remember having Been the, prisoner Payne in.Canad.? A. I db"not:I sbodld not' recognize as ever having met in Canada any except H-iroId. CJ. Did I understand you to siv that in the conversa tion occurring between these Rebels and their friends there was no reserve at all in discussing the question of the assassination of thePresident and his Cabinet? A- Ido not think you understood, me correctly if you understood me that, therp was ho reserve; there "was not a great amount of;reserve. ' <$. HI was discussed freely among themselves, then? A, Yes sir. CJ. Among the. persons nnmed was there not one who bore the nick-name, probably it Was '"Plug To bacco" or "kPort Tobacco?" A. ,"plug tobacco." I never saw him that I knpw 6f,-but I heard the name. Q. Was he in this list' that Sanders spoke of? A ' I am npt positive whether Sanders used his name or not, ¦but I think hedid. CJ, Doyou remember that Sanders.In speaking of Bopth asonewho was willing; toa>sasstnatethePres/deritand Cabinet, mentioned as among therfeasons -for it he was related toBeale.who had been recently hanged in New York? A. Hesaid that Booth, was heart arid soul in this matter, and felt as much as any person could feel. for the reason that be w,as a cousin to Beale, who was hung in New York; whether he was a cousin or riot, I do not know. CJ. What did he say, if anything, in regard to the assassination of the Vice President, now President.' of the United States? A. Hesaid that if they could dis pose of Mr. Lincoln it would be an easy matter to dis pose of Mr. Johnson, as hewas such a drunken sot i^> would be an easy matter to dispose of him In some of his drunken revelries. Q. Did he say anything in regard to Mr.Seward, the Secretary of SJate? A. When he read the letter he spoke of Mr. Seward, and I inferred tbat that was par tially the language of the letter; I think it was that if these parties, the President, the VicePresident and Cabinet, or Mr. Seward, epujd be disposed Of it would satisfy the people of the North that they (the South erners) had friends in theNqrth, and thatapeace could be obtained on better terms than it could other wise -be obtained; that thev, the Rebels, would endeavor to bring about a war between tbe United States and Eng land, and that Mr. Seward, through his energy and sagacity, had thwarted all their efforts. '.Q. That was suggested as one of thp reasons for gettingrid ofhim? A, Yps sir; for removing him. T CJ, At a later period, say early In April, did yoii meet any of these parties? A. Yessir. CJ. State who tbey were and what conversation oc curred between you and them. A. I was in Torontoon Wednesday arid Thursday. the5th and 6th of Apil last, andin the eyening of Wednesday I was on nay way going to tbe thealrewben I-metHarperaud Ford: thev asked me to go with them an4 spend, the evening, and I declined, as I was going totbe'theatre: the next morn ing I was around by tbe. Queers- Hotel, and I saw Harper. Caldwell, Randall, ^Ford, and one Charles Halt. , ,' CJ. Did you see a man called Texas? A. Yes sir. CJ. State the conversation which occurred then be tween you? A. Harper said that they were going to tbe States, and they were going to kick up the damnedst row that had ever been heard of yet: there was some other conversation passed among *s; I do not now remember what it v^as; nothing of any impor tance, till in the course of an hour or two afterwards I mevHarper, and hesaid if I did not 'hear of tbedeatrj of old Abe, or the Vice President, and of General Dix, m less than ten days, I might put liim down as a damned fool: the 5th,-as I find on looking at my visit ing list, and this was on thefith, , Q. Did Harper attfetime, or not. speak of Booth and Surratt as being at -Washington? A. I think that Booth's name was mentioned as being in Washingtori, put I do not remeniber Surratt's'at that lime. Q, Was anything said In regard to their having friends in Washington? A. Tbey said they hadplenty 6f friends here, and that there were some fifteen or, twenty going to Washington. CJ. Did you or not call afterwards and ascertain that Harper hadin fact left on theSth of April? A- On the Saturday afterwards I was, at Gajt; Harper's mother fs-llvmersome four or five miles from Gait, between tbatand Paris; I ascertained then that he had been to fhe place where he bad' been stoppirig, and, Caldwell, too, and had started for the States. >" CJ. After you had ascertained, this information that, thev had left for Washington probably for the purpose of assassinating the President, what! steps, if'any, did ypu take in the matter ? A. I went to a Justice ofthe peace for ihe purpose of giving information to have them stopped: his name was Davison. Q. State what occurred1 on your application? A, When I, gave the information, hesaid that the thing was too ridiculously absurd, or supremely absurd to take any notice, of; it woulrtonlypiafeeme appear very foolish to give such information, and cause arrests to be made on, those - grounds, as it was so inconsistent that no person would believe it. . cj. And therefore.did he or not decline Issuing any process? "A. He,deciiu,ed to issue process. CJ, Dp youor not know atwbattime this man Harper returned from the States to Canada? A. I have no pert sonal knowledge that he returned at all. CJ. What knowledge have you on the subject? A.I was in Gait on Friday again, and found there, from My. Ford, that lie had, been home on Thursday, and had started to go back to the States again; that was the Thursday ftfter the assassination. CJ. Didyou know while there one Colonel Ashley, a Bebel officer? A. Ididnotknowthat he was a Rebel officer; I knew that, bp was a Rebel sympathizer; hp was a brpker at Windsor, oppusite Detroit. CJ. Didyou ever kee a letter irom'Jacob Thompson, formerly Secretary of the Interior, to him? A. Some time last fall, I cannot tell exactly whattinae. Colonel Ashley banded pie, a .letter, which be said he bad re ceived from Jacob Thompson, asking him for funds for the benefit of tbe Bebels, to carry out tbeir objects in Canada, and he, asked me if I could not contribute; he read me the letter. CJ. Whatdid you understand from him and from that letter to be those objects? A- My understanding was that the purpose was to raise means to pay the expenses oj those who were unable to pay their own expenses, to go to the States and make raids; I" so understood the meaning of the letter; I may have misinterpreted it. CJ. Did you have any conversation, with Jacob Thompson or Clement C. Clay? A. I had a conversa tion with Mr. Clay. G> At what Lime? In February. CJ. Statewhatit was. A.I spoke to him in Toronto about the letter that Mr. Sanders had exhibited in Montreal— the letter of Jefferson Davis. CJ. Didyoustateto him wbat that letter was? A.He seemed to understand the riature and character of the letter perfectly: lasked him what he thought about it, and he said he thought the epd would justify the means; that was his expression. CJ-. Justify the assassination? A. That the end would justify tlie means. Q. You saythat when you mentioned to him the let ter from Jefferson Davis approving of this plan of assassinatipn.be seemed to understand it perfectly? A. Yessir, be seemed to understand it. CJ. Ybuspoke'of having heard the name Surratt; do you remember that be was at any time pointed out to you while you were in Canada? A. He was pointed, put to me once. CJ. At wbat time was tbat and where? A. It was in February, and, I think, in Toronto.' Q. With whom was he there, did you observe? A., I did notsee him with anyone: he was walking on the other side of the street, and was pointed out to me as beingSurratt, and I am inclined lo think it was Scott who pointed him out: and when he 'was pointed out Scott. Ford and myself were standing on tbe sidewalk. CJ. How often didyou see Booth there?, A. I saw Booth there two or three times. CJ. Withwbbmdidyougeperallyseehim associating? A. Ido not know that I could tell; 1 sat atthe table withhimonce atthe St. Lawrence; Sanders was at the same table, andScottand Steele and myself. CJ. Did yon see Sanders and Booth together? A. I do not know that I did any more than at the table; they were conversing with each other at the table; we all drank some wine at Mr. Sanders' expense. CJ. Was not Booth recognised by them all as their1 friend and as fully' cbriamitted to any enterprise they were engage^ in? A. I canppt answer that question, for I do not know. CJ. Did you bear what Sanders said of Booth? A. I know what was said in the meeting; outside of that I did not hear-any person speak particularly in relation to Booth. CJ. Did you have personal acquaintance with Booth yourself? A. No sir; I had seen him a^good many; times on the stage, and knew him very well by sight. CJ. (Exhibiting to the witness tbe photograph of J. Wilkes Booth, exhibit No. 1.) Is that a correct re presentation of him? A. I should think that was the man. CJ. What is the full name pf Harper, of whom you have spoken? A. George Harper. Cross-examined by Mr, Stone.-CJ. Did you see the man who was called Harrison, and whom you now think is Harold , mpre than once in Canada? A. I thinly I saw him two or three times. Q.At what time did you seehim? A. In February. CJ. What tirne in February? A. About the middle, or. somewhere about, the i5tb or 20th ofthe month. CJ. Did you make his acquaintance? A., I did not. CJ. Doyou remember who pointed him out to you? A. I think that itwasNa Mr. Brown, and Ford and Holt were together. Q. Was it in a street? A.Inasajoon. CJ. Night or day? A. in the evening. Q. Did you notice him more particularly than the' 136 TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT 'WASHINGTON! generality of persons in the saloon? A. I noticed him a little more particularly on account' of his name having been 'mentioned in connection with others at Montreal. . CJ. Was this in Montreal? A. No, this was in Toronto. CJ. Was Booth in tbe saloon? Np. Q. After he was pointed out you, saw him once or twice, and then he Went by the nariie-of Harrison, you say? A. It is my impression that he went by that name; I do not remember having heard the name or Harold mentioned at art. CJ.- Did you sep him after that at any time till now? A. No, sir, I did not. - , , CJ. And you saw.him to-day for the first time since that? A. Yes, sir.' ' CJ. How washedressed then, do yoii remember? A. I do nbt know thatL do. Q. I mpan thegpneral style ofthe dress; was he dressed well or not? A. I did not see anything about his, dress that particularly attracted, my at tention. Q. Ido not mean the color of his clothes, but was he genteelly dressed? A. I should think he was comfort ably dressed; some periple's ideas of gentility differ from those of others. , The hour fixed by the rules for that purpose having arrived, the Commission took a recess till 12 o'clock P. M. , Court room. Washington, D. C, Friday, May 2, 1865, 2 o'clock P. M. James J. Murphy, Edward V. Murphy and "Robert Congajes were duly sworn by tbe Judge .Advocate as reporters to the Commission irithe^res- 6n.ce PI the Court. , , Cross-Examiuaftion of James IS. MerriU. Continued by Mr. Aiken.— Q. Where were you born? A. I was born in'Canada. CJ. Then yon are a native of Canada? A. The first question asked, me by the Judge Advocate, was what State are you a native of;, my answer was tbat 1 could riottell; I can explain' th f; my people, lived' in. Rome, Oneida county. New York; father arid' mother were' ,1b. Caha'da visiting andtaking care of someof their friends at the time I was born; thetOiestion was raised the first time I offered my vote whether I was a native of New York or Canada, and was undecided. , By the Judge Advocate.— Q. That was what' you meant by your answer? A. Yes sir. By Mr. Aiken.— What is your age? A. Nearly forty: QYHow often did you visit Canada last summer and fall? A. I havebeen thereall the timesindejiaylast, pretty much, with, the exception of a few days in De cember, and at that time I occasionally went back and forth to Detroit. , CJ. What was your business in Canada? A. Practi^ cing medicine. CJ. When did. you first meet any of tbe parties you havo named in Canada? A. Some of them' I. met the first day I was there.' CJ. You went in May ? A. Yes sir. I went in May. CJ. Whore were they? A. Ford was there In May. Q. By whom were y.ou introduced to those parties? A. Some of them introduced themselves. ¦ CJ. Were you introduced to any of them? A. Then I was introduced afterwards to some; Colonel Ashley introduced me to Mr. Clay. Q. Was that the first introduction you had to these parties? A. That was the first Introduction I had to Mr. Clay. Q. To any of them? A. Oh, no! I think Colonel Ashley introduced me to, two or three others: there, among the rest, was Captain Scott, - CJ. How was it that you were on such confidential terms with these gentlemen? A. Because 1 was a good Southerner, and represented mj'sclf as such. Q. Is that the- reason why you were asked to con tribute? A. Y ps sir. CJ. On account or your known status there as a South erner? A. They supposed I was a good Southerner, and I presume that. was the reason' Mr. Ashley asked mo to coutributp. ( . Q, Youshoke PC drinking wine with Mr. Sanders; wastbat.b.eibre, or after the meeting at which the let ter was,rcaat;6 which you referred? A. Tbat was alter tho interview we had in OctPber, but before the meet-* ing at Which the letter of Davis was read. CJ. Where wag that meeting held? A. In.. Mr. San ders' room. ' . , Q. Who invited you to be present at that meeting? A. Captain Scott. 1 CJ. Is it possible that a portion ofthat letter has been misapprehended; I would like to .have you state the main points in it again? A. Mr. Sanders read theletw ter, aloud; I dip; nut read trie letter myself; I' think thatl stated that in t!.e commencement; the purport of the letter was that Mr. Davis did not wish to re cognize any persons as bis friends who were willing to submit to be governed by Mr. Lincoln, conveying. the sentiment tile language might be varleda good deal, and that if the President and Vice-President "and ¦some ot the Cabinet, and the leading generals could be disposed of, it would satisfy the people ol the North tbat they (the Rebels) had friends here. Ci. That was stated in tho letter? A. Tha* was stated in the Jetter;. I think that was the meaning of the let ter; the phraseology I perhaps do npt exactly, re member. CJ. We want to, know what, was actually said in the letter. A. I say that that was'the substance; I do not Sav that was the exact phraseology. Q. Was there anything more j-n the letter? A. There was considerable; it, was, quite a lengthy letter. CJ. Did you make any expressions at the time in the meeting? A. No'sfr. CJ. Did you see the justice of the peace to whom you referred immediately after that meeting? A. No sir. CJ. How long was it afterwards? A. It was over a month. ., . t CJ. What'tirhe was the letter read? A., The letter was read in February, arid. I went on the 10th of April to see th e j usjtice of the peace. CJ. After the justice ofthe peace refused toaccedeto your request, what did ypu then do? , A. I then called .upon a judge pf the Cpurt of Assizes, made my stated rrient tohim, and he said I shduld have to rgo to the grandjury. CJ. What did you do then? A. I did not do anything; I went home. . Q.'Wbeh did you first communicate to tbe Goverrij ment this information that you have detailed here? A, I think it was two weeks ago to-day. CJ. Since the assasination' or the President? A. Yes sir, ,,- r CJ. What was your object in keeping this information so long to yourself? A. There was no .authority to communicate it to. CJ. But as a good citizen ypu were bound, to commu nicate it; wby did yoU not d'o it? A. In the first, place 1 was not here where I could communicate: I am 'a practicing physician in North Dumfries, Canada; it is some five hundred or six' hundred miles from here.,. CJ. There is a post office at Dumfries? A. Yes sir; there is one. CJ, There is one at Toronto and pnp at Montreal? A. Yessir. , , ,, Q. Is that the orily reason that you have? A. !r^o sir; I canriot assign any particular reasons why Ididnot communicate it, the Government, though, was in pos session of thp information without my communicating it, I understand. CJ. Was it not owing to the fact that you are a. South erner iri your feelings and affiliations? A. Nosir., CJ. Where were you when Mr. Surratt was poiht'ed out to you, as you btate? A. Iu Toronto, I think. ' ' \ CJ. At what tiirip of theyear was that? A. That was in February. CJ. In February, 1865? A. Yes, sir: last February. CJ. Didyou have a good, view of the, gentleman? A, T saw him on the street. CJ. Were you on thfe same side ofthe street with him, or across? A. On the same side; he was pointed out coming towards me. apd on the opposite side; he crossed on the samp crossing, andpassed down by me. Q. What sort of a looking man was he? A.' I never saw him; buthe is a man, I should think, as tall as I am, nearly five feet six inches or seven or eight inches, rather slim, and he wore a moustache. CJ. What was tbe color of that moustache? A. Dark. Q. What v^as the color of his hair? A. I did not notice his hair partieularly; I noticed that be had a moustache. ' ( CJ. What was the color of his eyes? A. I do not know that I noticed. CJ. How was he dressed? A,, Dressed in ordinary clothes, like any gentleman would be. CJ. Dark colored clothes ? A. I should think they were, but I might be rnistaken. CJ. Are you pretty positive that, they were dark- colored clothes ? A. I Would not be* positive that they we're; I would not be positive that it was Surratt, either, because I do not know the man. CJ. What day ofthe mouth was jhat, as near as, you can recollect ? A. I should think it was somewhere in theneighb(orhoodofthe20th, perhaps; itwas aiterthe middle, Ishpuldjudge. Q' Who was the American Consul at Toronto ?. A. I do not know; I do not know an .Ariaerican Consul in the province. CJ. Did you ever meet him? A. Not that I know of. Q. There was one there? A. I do not know that I ever met him. , ,', , ., ¦ CJ. When you. were drinking wine at Mr. £>anders3 expense, and in convivial conversation with him, did he disclose to yo.u freely auy of the plans and pur poses of the Southern men in Canada? A. Not at tha table. ' CJ. Did he privately hxhisroom? A. T had no con versation with Mr. Sanders, except what I had at those interviews.in relation to any conduct of tho.feouthern- ers in Canada; that was in his room at 'the time I was introduced to him thy Clem^Steelp.,- Q. To go hack agaia— under what circumstances was the' geritlemanwhomyou think was Surratt pointed out to ypu? A. I da not kiioty ,tlmt it was under any parti cular fcirdirmstancesS a mari by the' name of Ford, who was present at, the meeting held in "Montreal, said ;-n "Doctor, that's Surratt. " CJ, 'Was Surratt mentiqned in the meeting? A. Surratt's name was. Q. Were yon talking with Ford at that time in regard TRIAI/ OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 137 to any of the plans and purposes divulged in, that meet ing?' A. Yessir. Q. Was that the occasion? A, That is how he hap pened to speak of this man. : , Q. You think he was a mail, ab.out.flve; feet six in ches high? A. Five feet six or eight inches, I should Judge. CJ, Your impression is that he was dressed in dark clothes? A. 1 could not say what his clothes were; he might bave,beeji dressed in dark clothes, or dark grey, or grey; I could not now tell, for'.the lifeof me, wbathe was dressed in. CJ. You think he had a dark moustache? A. I think his moustache was dark; it was not red; at least I think it was not- , , ' - ., i By the Judge Ad vocate.— CJ. I understand you to say that tb,e occasion of Surratt's beipg, pointed out to you was because he was one of the men spoken of in this meeting who were willing to .accomplish the assassina tion, of the President? A. He was one of the men Spokeni of by Mr. Sanders; Mr. Ford was present at the time Mr. Sanders mentioned it. ' CJ. How many were present at that meeting? A. I '.ahpu'd think tLiere were ten or lifieeri, , CJ. Haw many can you name? name as many as you can. 'Q/ There Was Mr. Sanders, Colonel'Steele, Capt. Scott, Geprge Harper- Caldwell, Ford, Kirk, Benedict, George Young'arid Byron Hill. *CJ. Do you know whether this Harper was or was not Jxoni Bichmond, Virginia? A. I believe that Harper ,and Caldwell were both residents of Richmond, viif- giriia; at least tbey represented themselves as 6uch. Q. Did'they represent themselves to bave been in theBebeLservice? A. 1 believe they had been; I think they had been in tbe Rebel service; whether they Were coinmissioned or privates I cannot say. .;, CJ. The Clay of whom you bavp spoken is Clement C. Clay, of Atabama. formerly of tlie tlnited States Senate, is it hot? A. Yes sir; C. C. Clay— a tall*, slim man. By Mr. Aiken.— Q. From what point did you commu nicate this. information to the Government? A. In the War Department; Q. Didyou, come. directly here?, A. Yes sir; I have In my pocket a letter' from the Provost Marshal-Gene ral , stating that he had received a letter whipb proved to have been written by Squire Davison, giving infor mation of my visit to him when I wished to have Harper apd Caldwell arrested, and when, on the re ceipt of that letter ..they sent to Canada forme; if you wish to see tlie letter I can produce it. By the Judge Advocate.— CJ. By whom was that l.etr ¦ter, written?, A. By General Fry. The Judge Advocatet without objection, offered the letter in evidence; It is as follows:-; . <" War Department, , Pbovost Marshal-Gen eral's Bureau, Washington, D. C April 20„ 18G5.r- To Dr. J. B. Merrill, Agerit, Canada West.-^Sir: I, have been informed that you possess.information. connected with a plot to assassinate the President of thetUnited States and other prominent, heads of this ;Opvera- ment. The bearer has been, sent to present this let ter to you, and lo accompany you to this city.iit you will come. The Secretary of War authorizes me to pledge you protection and security, and to pay all expenses connected with your journey, both ways, and, in additiori.'to promise a. suitable reward if use ful information is furnished. ,, Independent of these considerations, it is hoped that the cause- of humanity and justice will induce you to act promptly in divulging anything you may, know connected with the recent tragedy in this city, or wi.th any other plots vet in preparation. The bearer, is di rected to pay all expenses connected with your trip. , "I am, Ac., very respectfully, " Your obedipntservant. "JAMES B-- FRY. "Provost Marsh aliGeneral." . . The original of the foregoing is annexed to* this re cord, and marked Exhibit No. 5. , , By the Judge Advocate.— CJ. It was under ,that letter you came? A. Yes sir. ' i , BytheCourt.^Q. The witness in giviDg the, reason for, his admission to the.meeting of the conspiraturs in Canada, said it was because he wasagpod Southern man, and then in giving a reason for not communi cating this information tothe Government, hesaid emphatically that, he was not a. good ..Southern man- how is that discrepancy explained? A. I said they ad mitted me because I was a good southern- man, and Xsaid it in such a ,way that I thought it would be un derstood that Ihad made the impression on. tbeir minds that I was a good Southern man; God knows I am not a Southern man in sentiment, because I have taken the oath of allegiance too often. By Mr Aiken:*— Where were you at the time Mi% Ashley asked you to contribute? A. In Windsor, oppo site Detrpit. ., ¦ - . < CJ You stated that you did not contribute anything at that time.,; A. I did not. . -„_*¦' ,q, Didyou ever contribute anything for that . spe cific purpose? A- Nosir. . . 0, Either in money, or services, or advice? A. No , CJ. When did you leave New York? A. Four or five or six years ago, more than that. CJ. When were you last in New>Yofk city? A. I bave not.been there, I think, Since 1858 or i'859. Q. Did you know anything ofthe plot to bum thai city? A. I did. q: Did you communicate that to any one? A. I did. Q. To whom? A. To Colonel Hill, of Detroit. Q. Howdidyoucoine to find out anything about it? A. Iheardittalkedof at Windsor. Q. Did ypu communicate your knowledge before or after tlie attempt to burn that city? A. Beiore the at tempt. | CJ. Areyou acquainted with Robert Burfall, of To ronto? A. Nosir. , , i CJ. Didyou ever seepim?.. A. Not that I know of. CJ,. lie is the Consul there. A. I do not know him.' , CJ. Who ofthe Southerner* communicated lo you their, intentions to,burn New York city at Windsor? A. Robei'Lt.P[rake, formerly of Morgana command. 'Q. was he the only one? A. Another, of the name of fcfjnith; I do not know Smith's first name., but they were'both of Morgan's command,, and they both ;had been to Chicago to attend trip Presidential Convention; they went there for the purpose of destroying the pub lic peace and releasing the prisoners at. Camp Doug las; at least they told, me that was their object in going after they returned. , , - ' Q. Atyer you had been thus made aware of the plot to burn the city of New York, and enmrait'that depre dation in Chicago,. why did you continue jour iriendly relations with that class of men? A. For , the purpose of giving information when I should find it of im portance; another thing, my practice was mostly. among that class of men among Southerners;, if you go to, Canada you will find that niqe-tenths of the people are rank Rebel sympathizers. . Q. Did you continue your friendly or confidential re lations with them after that?. A. I did. CJ. By whom, were you- paid for communicating, .the information? A, I never have received a dollar; the Government did advance me money here the other daytopaymy expenses; I have proof in my pocket, which I cap show, if it is necessary, from the Provost Marshal at Detroit, that Ifurpished valuable informa tion without any remuneration. Q. Why after this, andyou were continuing your re lations with them, should tbey continue. to think you a good Southerner? A. You must ask them; they can give you rnore inforrhation on that point than I can., CJ. Didyou, intentionally deceive them? A. My in tention, was to get all, the information I .could from them. CJ. Atthe. same time pretending to be their friend? A. Yessir. .._.,., TesttMmoiBy of Saatdforcfl Conover. Sandford Conover, a witness called for the prosecu tion, being duly sworn, testified -as follows;— By Judge Advocate Bingham.— Q. State your full name and present place of residence. A. Sandford Conover, Montreal, Cauadai ' ; ' 1 CJ. How long have you -resided in Montreal? A. Since October last. ' • Q. State whereyou resided previous to going to Canada- A.' I resided a short time in Baltimore. Q. State whether you resided further South before that. A.^Yessir.atTtichmond? ' ¦ ' -• ¦¦ CJ. State what you were doing at Richmond ? A. t was a -clerk "In the War Department for a time. CJ;: How long ? A. Upwards of six months. CJ. -Do you mean the War Department of the Confed erate States Government, as it was called?'- A'. Yes sir, in thp Rebel War Department. CJ. Who wasat that time Secretaryof War for that organization? A. Mr. James A. Setfdpn. CJ. How did you come to be in the Rebel service ? A. I was conscripted, and defiailed for a clerkship: it was a cheap way of getting clerks. CJ. Stateito the Court whether when you were over in Canada you made the acquaintance of any of the persons cdnn'ected'withthe Confederate organization, as1 it .was called. Rebels fmm the Southern State's. A. .¦Idid, and have been quite intimately associated with them. CJ. Bfrtatethenamesiof those with whom yduwereso acquainted in Canada. A. George N. Sanders, Jacob Thompson* Dr. Blackburn; Beverly Tucker, William C. Cleary, Lewis Cast! em an, the Rev. Mr. Cameron", Mrr- -Porterfield, Captain Magrrider, and a number who are of less note. ¦ CJ. Did you know Clement C. Clay? A. I knew'himj I may also include Generals Frost, of Missouri, and Carroll of Tennessee. > - Q. Were you also acquainted with any persons' who occasionally visited tifie persons named in Canada from the United States? A. I knew some. CJ. What were their names? A. I knew Mr. Surratt; I knew Booth. Q. John Wilkes Booth? A. Yes sir. CJ. State whether you saw either of those persons lasp named in Canada since then once? A. J never saw Booth since then once; I saw Surratt on several suc^ cessivedays. Q. With whom did you seo' them wheri there? A. I saw Surratt on a number of days in April last; I saw him. in Jacob Thompson's rooms, and I also saw him 138 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHWGTOtt. 4n-teompany with George N. Sanders at two or ttiifee ' ay be allowed I will state my first interview on that subject. . CJ. When was your first interview with him on that Subject? A. In February last. CJ. About what time in February? A. Inthe early part of/February; , CJ. Thatwus, where? A. That was in Mr. Thompson's roorii in the St. Lawrence Hall Hotel. , CJ, State if you please what was said at that time hy Mr. Thompson, on -that snbject.inyoui'presence. A. I had called on Mr. Thompson to. make some inquiry about a raid that had been, contemplated onOgdens- jaurg, New York, which had iafcled because the United states Government had received some in ton-nation of the- intention of the R,ebels*and were prepared for it; andlcaUedto see what was to be done next, seeking Items for my newspaper,, and. being supposed by Mr. Thompsonito .he a good Rebel; he said we would have to drop it for a time, but we would catch them asleep fpt, and be observed "tbere.a8 a better opportunity— a etter chance to immortalize yourself and save your -country," Hold hinalwas ready to do anything to eavethe country, ana asked what was to be doner he said some of our boys are going to play a gran&joUe oa Abe arid Andy, that Was his expression; this led/to ex planations, when he inforrhedrneitwasto kill tbem', or ratherTto' remove lhein from office, to use his Own expression; hesaid it was only removing them froiri. office: that the killing oY a tyrant was.no, murder. ^ CJ. State whether-anything was said at that time on the subject of commissipns from the Rebel author!* ties in his hands blank. A. He had commissions and conferred one on Booth: I am hot so positive wbethere hehad conferred it on Booth or not, but he told me, either then -or subsequently, tbat Booth hag. been commissioned, and that everybody engaged in tbe enterprise would be cpnamissioned. andiritsuc- ceeded or failed, and they escaped to Canada, tbey could not be successfully claimed under the extradi tion treaty. 'r,J" ' " !p ' ' ;"' , Q. State whether you have any personal knowledge of their holding these commissions in blank from the Confederate States, A. Yds- sir; the commission con ferred on Bennett H.Young, the St. ' Albans raider, was given to him in blank. CJ. JBy whom? A. Itwas a blank commission filled rip 'an d'eoni erred by Mr. Clay. , ., Q. What name was attached to it'as ?t came into th^It -hands from: the men From Richmond, if any? A. James A. Sedden, Secretary of War. ¦ JQ. State to the Corirt whether yoii saw the commls> sion yourself. A. I did. Q. At Wbrise instance were you called to see'it ? JA. Mr. Tborripfcon. CJ. State whether you were asked to testi'fy about the genuinerieSs ofSeddon's signature, you having been a clerk ih the Department. A., I was. Q. Bv whom were ydu asked? A. By Mr. Thomp son and Mr. Abbott, the^couhsel in the case, arid also by Sanders, and- Young himself, Q. State whether you did testify 6n the question of the genuineness of the sighatureof -Seddon. A.I did. CJ. In that Court? A. I testified -before JuSge '-. the signature was genuine. Q. A re you acquainted and" familiar with the band- writing of James1 A. Seddon, the Rebel Secretary or War?. A. Yes-sir. CJ. State how to the Court, upon your oath here, whether the signature tothe blank commission you Saw was his genuine signature or not. A. It was hia genuine signature. Q. You Say ypu had a subsequent conversation with ThPmpsPn afteir the one ytiu have spoken on as early asFebruary. before the time you met him withSPrratt; whattimein February was It thatyoubad thatsubse- ?[Uenfr conversation? A. I had conversations with hinj ram day to day almost every -day during the whole of February. '; CJ. On any one of these occasions did he offer you one of these commissions in the work of the assassination. of the*President? A. Nothing further than this, that he suggested that I might immortalize myself and save the country, and in that sarin e connection said that Booth had been commissioned, and that every man who would engage in the enterprise would be. CJ. In their subsequent Conversations state anything that was said about the extent to which thiS plot was to be carried, what lahguage was uspd.. President and his Cabinet. A. That was the understanding. ' Q. Was that the substance of his conversation or not? A. That was the substance of thfe conversation. , Q. I should like to know whether anything was said _Jn theseveral conversations you had with Thompson, Clay and Sanders about the use of mPney in this busi ness or not? A. I do not think there was, bat it was always well understood) there was plenty of money when there was anything to, be done; I do not thi tik I ever heard anything said, about money or compensa tion at. all. CJ. When you say it was always understood, do you mean it was so stated in general terms, by these men, or not? A. I do not think there wasanythingsaid on the subject; there may have been but not in my presence; I think there was nothing said on the subject , of money. CJ. Did Surratt state at that time, at what time he had left Richmond, or not? A. Iidonotrememberthat he did , but it was a very few days before; I do not know whether he stated it or whetber I understood- it from Mr. Thompson, or how, but the understanding was that it was a very short time before; he was just from Bichmond j as I understood it. Cross-examined by Mr. Doster.— Q. Did you ever see the prisoners, Payneor At-zerothj in Canada? A. No sir; Ido not think I ever saw either of them any where (the prisoner. George A. Atzeroth. stood up for identification); nosir, I have no recollection of ever seeinghim,; I think not. . i v CjTYou state tbat you had never seen the prisoner, Payne, in Canada? (Payne stood up for identification.) A. I have no recollection ot it. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— CJ. When did you Jeave Richmond to go North? A., In December, 1863. CJ. Did you go immediately to New York? A. Yes eir. ¦ J ¦ . ¦ . i Q. Did you, in New York, make an arrangement to become the correspondent of the Tribune ? A. Nosir; l contributed articles which were published, and my arrangements were made in writing afterwards; the first article I contributed wasfrom this Gity. ; CJ. Was tbe arrangement made in New York? A. No sir; it was made by letter. Q. Where was it made? A. Itwas made in answer to my first communication; I enclosed the letter for publication ,to the editor of the New York Tribune, which was put out, and I was requested to continue my correspondence, and do so. and received compen sation from time to time. CJ. What I want to get at is, where you were at the time you were engaged as a correspondent ofthe Tri bune; were you in Washington at the time you made a regular connection with the Ti~ibune; a correspondent. A. Yea sir. CJ. Then bow soon did you go to Canada? A. I went to Canada lastOctober. CJ. Iu addition to being a correspondent of the Wrihui\& were you in theiservice and pay of our Govern ment? A. Nosir. - Q. Have you ever received compensation or pay from our Government for services rendered? A. Not one cent nor promise. Q. Did. you give out while in Canada, was it gener ally understood, that you were a correspondent ofthe Wrfbune. A. No, sir; it was understood tbat I was a Bebel. CJ.- When you asked these gentlemen whom you have named, if tbey had items tbat would be fit for publicat ion, what paper did they suppose you were in correspondence with? A. I never asked them Ior any Items, they never supposed I was a correspondent ior any paper. > , CJ. you said something about items for a paper. A. I was seeking items, but I did not ask for them; wbat I, however, learned in conversation, and learned from these parties, was because they supposed that I was a Rebel, and was in their confidence, :j Qi, Then they never bad. any. means of knowing that yon were a correspondent of the Tribunet A. No sir. t, ft. Were you admitted freely to their meetings? A. Yes sir, quite so. ' T.LI; . \- Y. Andto their confidence, too? I think so. sir; they may have had secrets that I am not aware of, but I certainly knew of a great many ofi their matters that they intended to keep- secret from pie public. ,. ¦ ¦ Q. Was the disclosure of the intended raid on Og- densburg published m the Tribune? ' A. IthinkltwaS; I contributed a letter with information ol tbat kind in it. ' Q. Did I understand you as stating to the CoUitthat you also communicated to the Tr/bune something off the plot about the assassination? a. Yessir; I wrote them on that subject. ' ¦ ¦ >\ CJ. Did you communicate it to any one else? 'Ai No one but to the Tribiene and my own iamily. CJ. What was- your idea in not communicating that important intelligence at once to the Governments ihJ stead of bo the Tribune? A* I supposed that in giving it to the Tribune that it amounted to the same thing as* giving It to the Government; I siippbsed tbat the rela tions between the editor and proprietors of the Tribune and tbe Government were such that they would' lose no time in giving their information on the' subject, and iTdid not choose to bave the information go to the Government directly from me, in regard to- this as in regard to some other secrets ofthe Rebels in" Canada that I have exposed; I requested Mr. Gay, of the Tribune, to giVe inibrination to the Government, and I believe be baS formerly doneso. CJt You must have been- aware, as ft newspaper man, that it the fact was published in the newspapers, it would defeat the opportunity of capturing the parties? A. Certainly so, sir. CJ. How many times did you see Surratt in Canada?- A. I saw him for three or lour times in Succession, I think in April last. CJ. Iu whose room did you meet him? A. I saw him in Mr. Jacob Thompson's room; I also sawhina in Mr. Sanders' room once. Q. Had you any conversation with him personally? A. I had. , CJ. What did he say to you? A. Nothing more than speaking about Richmond,- and asking him how it looked, and what changes there werein it. CJ. He never said anything toyou personally himself about the intended assassination?" A. No sir, only" what was said in Mr. Thompson's room'; I was Intro duced to bim by Mr. Sanders; that was the first I had seen of him. Q. Since you learned of the assassination to whom did you communicate your previous knowledge of IV9 A. Tothe Tribune people? CJ. Did you go in Canada by the name of Sandford! Conover? A. Nosir. CJ. What name did you go by there? A. James Wat son Wallace. Q. Fix the predse date, If you can, when you met Mr. Surratt at Mr. Thompson's rooms? A. I could not say within two or three days; I think It might have been the7th,or8th.or9th or" April; ' Q. On or about that time? AjVes sir, It was near that time. ¦Q. Did vou learn anything While in Canada of the attempt to fire the city of New York? A. Yessir, I heard the matter discussed.- Q^Did you communicate that intelligence to ariy one? A. I knew nothing of it until after the attempt had been made. Q. In representing yourself to those parties as being a good Rebel, andbeing in confidence, were you eve* charged with tbe execution of any plot or project of theirs? A. Nosir. ¦ CJ, You never received any pay from our Goverti- menVor from' tbe so-called Confederate Government^ since you have been in Canada? No sir; from no onej except the New York STW6ime; CJi Did you sign your name to tbe articles' in tho Tribune that were published? A. No sir. Q. Gave nosignature? A. Nosir, none at all; it was not desirableto the publishers. Cross-examined by Mr. Cox;— CJ. Did you hear dis cussed among these individuals tbe -project ot the cap* ture of thePresident and conveying him off toBich* mond? A. YeB; Ithink I heard that talked of in Febrii* ary. CJ. Did you ever attend a meeting of all those persons —Thompson. Clav, and others? A. I have been with Messrs. Thompson, Sanders, Tucker, Cleary, and Genl Carroll at the same time. \Q. Haveyou ever attended a meeting for the purpose of considering plans, of bearing among themselves any advices irom Richmond? f A. Not for the purpose of considering any plaris; Q. Were you present at any meeting in which a letter from Davis was read? A. No, not when it was read, those letters were all in cipher, and'JC merely heard the substance'Of them repeated. Q. You spoke of Mr. Thompson's laying his hand upon some letter, and saying that made it. all right? A: That referred to the despatches from Richmorid, brought by Surratt. , -, ' CJ, That was Iri April, was it not?. A, Yessir, Jtwa$ In April; I bad previouslv asked Mr. Thompson, when he first suggested that I should participate in this affair if it Would meet the approbation ofthe Govern ment at Richmond; hesaid, he, thought \x, would, but he should know in a few days; that early in February. CJ I thought I understood you to state that he said the* authority was given in February? A.^o, sir, in i April, in Surratt's presence. - . , . 140 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. . CJ. And ,hp then referred to those papers as having furnished the assent? A. Yes, sir. ,-, , f, , CJ. Thefirststatement in,Februaryjwas,that.he was expecting despatches from Bichmond, and expected, them iu a few days? A. Yes, to know whether the affair would receive the approbation of the Govern^ mentor not. . , ,. ,h., m . - . i , , ,, , - , Q^Did you understand that that communication .in AprU'Was. the first official' approval , that they had re ceived from Richmond of the plan to assassinate the President. ,A. I. understood that it was not said that Itwas the first, but J, knew no, others. ,: , ¦ i ,',,,( - Q. Yo.u upderstoodthat was the first? A. Yes sir; I inferred, that., ,, !,,,'f ; . -- * By Mr. Aiken.— CJ. ,tn all your conferences , apd fa miliar interviews with those Rebels.in Canada did you everihear the name of:Mary E. Surratt mentioned as a friend of theirs? A. , I never did, . , By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham. —CJ, Didyou statein answer to, one of the. questions put to you on the examination, anything about a remark, by, Mr. Jacob Thompson, that it was not murder to kill a tyrant? A. Yes sir; he said that killing .a tyrant in such a case was no. murder, and hei asked me atthe same time if-I had ever read the.- work entitled "Kill ing. no Murder," aletter addressed by, Colonel Titus to Qliver.Crpmwell. , , ,,.-. . Q. In what conversation was it that Jacob Thomp son made use ot 'that expression? A. That was in the Qo.uvprsation in Febrparry. ¦ ,,,.. : " j ,--,.. CJ. Was it in that conversation henamed.-the Cabir netcfficers and others that were to be victims -of this conspiracy?, A. Yes sir; jt.was at that time Mr. -Ham lin- was to have been included had the scheme been carried out beforpthe fourth of March. - . i.. CJ. Was he named especially? A. Yes sir, witb. the rest. i ,---.,.-¦ ,, ,CJ„ Were .the parties that you have enumerated named aiso in February? A. Yes sir. - , , ,.CJ. Whatimembers ot the Cabinet? -CJ. The Secne- tary.of War, the Secretary^)! State, General Grant, Judge Chase, the Vice President .-and President Lin- coVh... - -' . if ,, .- ..,¦ in,.- r i, CJ. In April who else was named? A, The same persons, with the exception- -that Mr. Hamlin was omitted and Vice President .Johnson put , in his place, By the Court.— Q. You have stated that you were a Conscript, iu,tbeB,eb8l;service?,an what S,tate were you conscripted? A. South Carolina. (.. » - By Assistant Judge- Ad vooate ,Bingham. — CJ. Of what State are you a native? A. NewYorkt- , . i, , . CJ. Where were you residing when yon were con scripted? A. Near Columbia. South Carolina. : By the Court.— How did you come from Richmond? A. Iran the blockade; I walked it most .of the way;. ii roae in the cars to Hanover Junctiun, and from ¦ there walked. ,, , j ; CJ. By way of .the;Pptomac? A. I came .up through - Snickersville tp Cbarlestown, Virginia, and. from, there to Harper's Ferry, and so on. ' , - CJ. As I understand you, , you said you saw those blank commissions u that weneisignedn by . Sedden, Secretary of War, to be given to the persons that were tobe engaged in the assassination: of, the President and Cabinet? A... I saw commissions alter they had heen filled. . [vi,., , u n,t> •¦ >, ¦ > Q. In Canada? A. Yes, sir. • , . , , ¦ -nQ.Did you sae:how much of.them was blank; when they .came thene lrom, Richmond? A. They were all blank but the,signat_uresi. . i > Q. Was there no grades of rank -in them? A. No sir, that was, put [on by, the agents themselves; tbey conferred these commissions, at pleasure. ¦ i 3 Q. Did -you 'Understand .that these commissions were to be given upon their engaging in this affair as sort of. cover an. case they were taken; or that tbey were to go into the army? A. It was a cover, bo that in case, they were detected thev coulrl claim tbat-they were Rebel soldiers.* and would .therefore claim to be treated as prisoners of war. and it was understood tbat they would be protected as such. t-Q. These commissions, you say, were to begivento them as soon as they.engaged in this enterprise? A. By Mr. Stone.— Q. Were theseeommissionstOibe con ferred principally} ua arewaifd. for carrying out this assassination project, or i lor any of these enterprises tnat were prosecuted, on then borders? A. It Was to enable the parties upon whom thev were conferred to act officiailijr as Rebel soldiers, and be protected as such in case they- were detected. CJ. Could that. apply to anything but raids on > the borders; rhey could not expect an assassin to i be pro tected by a commission? Af It- was no murder, Mr Thompson said. , " 'Qr Did tine giivins these commissions have reference tb the assassination, or embrace all enterprises on the, border? A. it embraced the whole of them, but I think- Booth was especially commissioned for this purpose;' the commissions were all in blank; the com mission of B II. Young was a cpmmission of the Same sort, and was filled up and conferred by Mr. Clay; he never was in Richmond at all. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham:— CJ. I forgot to ask you what time it was you saw J. Wilkes 'Booth In Canada?, A. Isaw him in the latter part of October* I think. ¦ , , ¦ uiji. -iii',' '¦ ' ¦j Q- Withiwao-miwas'&e? A. Irsaw/him withSandeia at Mr. Thompson's, but more about the St. Lawrjanflfl Hotel; be wasiatirufcting.abouJt.'dissipalfing.playirjg.bil- ljards, Ac&o., ;,> ; -¦ : '¦>•. w .< -. • i By-Mr. Cox.-rWas it in February that. Mr.. Thomp son said he had conferred one commission onBooth? &. It was in the early part of February, or it might have been the latteac'part of January. , , ,¦ i By the Court.,-©* Did -the same party that planned the assassination plan the burning of New York and ottber cities? &., Ii do -not Mnow anything further than that I., have an opinion on the subject; I pre sume thpy did. ., ,,i,,. Q. Is it your belief that they did? A. Yes sir. (CJ. This same, party? i A., I have heard them talk of some other enterprises of thesame sort; .some they have under consideration now; the same men planned the-St. Albans raid. • „ • v ¦ jQ. Were.the!- commissions you speak of similar to those issued bv tlie Governmen-tjto .army officers? A; They -were merely isighed by the Secretary of War and nut by tbePresidert. -.-.-;¦ '. i ' ;By -Mr. Aiken. -^CJ. Yo.u referred to tbe same party, inspeakingof theSt. AJbansraid; what party do you mean? A. Mr. Thompson.' and Sanders. ' -. s CJ. You donotrnean Surratt and Booth? A, Nosirj : CJ. Were these commissions signed- by Jefferson Davis in blank? A. Nosir; by James A. SeddPni, Sec retary of W.ar.^iK. .a , ¦ . u - . . By Associate Judge Advocate' Bingham.— Q,.> Is ft not the custom- for the President to sign them> also? A. They have not lived long enough to bave a cusr torn; on the trial cf the St. Albans raiders General Can ol and a number of other officers ofthe Confede* rate arm- testified that itfie-.cusj&om was that Rebel offi cers had their commissiO/Hs signed only by the Secre tary of War. * - ¦¦¦¦ ' > . ¦., v By ihe, Court.— CJ. Are you familiar with the cipher which they had in the Rebel War Department? .A. No six; J ami not. CJ. You could not tell one if you should see it? A. I couldnofi, ...... ¦> ¦. , > > > By Associate Judge Advocate Bingham.-7-Q', I am instructed to> "make an inquiry of you, in conse quence of a. question asked- you by the Court; what conversation, if any, did you 1 bear among • those Rebel refugees in Canada about the burning of New York city and other Northei*ht cities? A. There was a proposition before their council, their junta, to de stroy the C'roton Dam, by which the city of New York is suppi-ied with'water, and it was supposed it would not only damage the manufactures,' but distress the people generally, everywhere;.but Mr. Thompson re marked that they would- have'plenty of fires, and the whole city wouldsnon-tte-destrbyedby' a general con flagration, and without sending any Kennedy, or any^ body else there, and if they had' thoughtof this scheme before, they might have saved snmenecks. CJ. When did he say that ? A. That was a few weeks ago. i- ;.,.!-.¦,:,¦ . -1 ¦ CJ. Who was present when 'he-- said that? A. Mr; Thorn peon, myseil, Mrv'Sanders, Mr. Castleman and General Carroll. .,.;-¦ ,.-¦ >:>". 1 CJ. Do you know of' anything being said between thoseparties, or any others; ofthe same man you have named in regard to the 'description 'from 'Chicago iast yeai\ A. I heard, a very great* "deal* of talk about J t, andi'knovv l hey had arms^eohcealed there, and tbat they had a large number of men concealed away at Chicago: some eight-hundred men there. CJ. Did Thompson and the others state for what-puiS pose? A. Releasing the* prisoners, -/it was understood. ¦ CJ. What prisoners? A. At Cahap Douglasj I think they called it. or Camp Chase, or whatever camp it mayhave b&en in Which they were confined. CJ. You mean Rebel prisoners? A. Y'es sir; I think they called itCamp Douglas. - ¦ [The Commission then- adjourned until Monday morning, May 22d. at 10 o'clock. Monday morning May 22d, .Santbrd Conover recalled for the prosecu tion.] >¦ ' ¦ 1 -¦ 1 "> By the Judge Advocate.— 1. You have probably ob* served that,' insome judicial proceedings which have recently taken nlaoe at Nassau, it has been made to appear ihata cert ain 'DruBlaokburn packed a-number of trunks with clothes infected with the yellow-fever ibr the purpose, through them, of introducing tHe pes tilence into the'City of New York; I wish youtso*state whother or not the Dr. Blackburn referred to in tbosfl proceedings is or is not tho same person to whom you referred. )m your testimony dm Saturday as being in in timate association with Thompson, Clay. and:others? A. It is thesame person* but iriPver saw hfm with Clay. ' . r CJ. Will you state- the persons whom you saw as» sociating. with' this Dr. Blackburn, in Canada? A Jacob Thompson, George N. Sanders,' Lewis Sanders', son of George; ex-Governor Westcott, of Florida; Lewis Castleman, William C. Cleary.' ' >< Q. Was Clay among them? A. No sir, I never saVfr Clay with "them {j Magrudcr, and a number of Rebels of lesser note. ¦ CJ. State: whetber or not this Dr. Blackburn Was re- Cognized there and known as an agent of the so> called Confederate1 States. A. Yes sir; he was said to be an agent, and represented himself as an agent. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. EDWABU SPANGLEB. G. A. ATZEBOTH. SAMUEL ABNOLD. 10 MICHAEL O'LAUGHLIN. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 141 CJ. Just as Jacob Thompson was an agent? A. Yes; yes.' (J, Will you state whether or not you had anv con sultation among these men upon ihe subject ot intro ducing the pestilence into the cities of the United States, and what was said, and when? A. In January last I knew of Dr. Blackburn s employing a person to accompany lrm. for that purpose. CJ. Name tlie party? A. Mr. John Cameron, for the purpose of taking-charge ol' •good*! and banging them to the cit.es of New York, Philadelphia and Washing ton, as I understood. CJ. You mean goods infected with vellow fever? A Yes sir: I heard Dr. Blackburn say that about a year before that time he had endeavored to introduce the « fever into New York, but, for somereason wnicnldo not. remember, failed; he went lrom Montreal abouta year atro last January to Bermuda, or some ofthe West Ind:a islands, for tneexpress purpose of at tend ing cases of yellow fever, collecting imected clothin-?, a!9o, and forwarding it to New York, but for some rea son tfte scheme failed. Q. Didyou Jearnon his return, in the course of that consults. on. what hehad done and what had inter fered, if anything had, to lead to a iai lure ofthe enter prise? A. I have seen him. but not to speak to him Bincehis leturu. Q. Was Jacob Thompson present at tbese con- soltations? A. On one occasion I remember Jacob Thompson, and Mr. Clay, aud I think also Lewis Sanders. Q. Will you state whether or not they concurred in the enterprise of Dr. Black Burn in trod icing the pesii- lericeinthe manner indicated? A. Yes sir; they al! favored ir. and were all very much interested in it; at this time it was proposed to destroy ibeCroton dam, and Dr. Blackburn proposed to poison the reservoir, audmade a calculation ofthe amount or" poisonous matter it would require 10 impregnate tbe water so far as to render an ordinary draught poisonous and deadly. _. Q. Had he taken the mpasure of the aqueduct, so as to ascertain what amount would be required? A. Hehad the capacity oi the reservoirs, and the amount of water that was generally kept in them. CJ. Wa3 the kind of poison which he proposed to use mentioned.' A. Strychnine, arsenic and ac.ds— prussic ac.d, and a number of others which I do not remember. Cj.-Didheor not regard the scheme as a feasible one? A. Yes; Mr. Thompson, however, feared it would he impossibe lo collect so large a quantity of poisonous matter without exciting suspicion, and loading to the detection ct" the parties: but whether thescheme has been entirely abandoned or not I do not know: so lar as the blowing up of the dam is concerned it has not been. CJ. Will you state whether or not Thompson fully approved of the enterprise, if practicable? A. yes sir. Q. Discussed it freely? A. Yessir. CJ. Did the other persons whom you have named also discuss it and ""approve it? A. Mr. Lewis Sanders and Mr. Clenry, I remember very well, did. Q, When was this matter discussed? A. In January last: I have beard it spoken of since. Q. Among the same persons? A. With the excep tion of Dr.Hiackburn. Q. If was spoken of by a Mr. Montross? A. Patton. of Mississippi: also, a Rebel who had been a medical purveyor In the Rebel army. Q. Where doe* the- agent, John Cameron, of whom you speak as having been employed by Dr. Blackburn for this purpose, live? A. He has lived in Montreal; he declined to go, being fearful of tailing the yellow fever and dying himself. CJ. Do you know whether a large compensation was offered him? A. Yes sir; to the extent of several thousand dpllars. be. told me. ,&. Did vou understand whether this was to be paid by Jacob Thompson? A. lunderstoodbyDr.Blackbnrn or by theagents; I think Mr. Thompson was tberaonied agentfor all theother agents: I think they all drew on him ior what money they received; I know that some of them did. CJ. You say that up to tbe time when you left Canada, or at the assassination of the President, you didJnot know whether this enterprise for poisoning the people of the city of New Yoik had been abandoned or not bv these conspirators? A. No sir, I did not knowwhetberit had been abandoned; so. far as tbe de struction of the dam is concerned that part ot the ficheme bad not been abandoned. CJ. Tne only difficulty which Jacob Thompson sug gested, I understood you, was that the collection of so large an amount of poison might attract attention to the operation? A. Yes sir; Mr.' Thompson made a suggestion of that kind, but Mr. Pattin and others thought it could be managed in Europe* CJ. Pattin himself is a physician, Is he not ? A. Yes sir. CJ. State whether In connection with this enterprise tor introducing pestilence to our cities you have heard mentioned the name of Harris as an agent in any way' A I do not distinctly remember that I have; I think I have heard him mentioned, but I have never seen the person. CJ. Have you any recollection as to where he proba bly resided at tbat lime? A. Toronto, J think. CJ. Yon have no knowledgeof any part heactuallv performed, orundertook to perform? A. Nosir- there were other parties in Montreal that Dr. Blackburn' had aiso employed, or endeavored to employ, but I don t remember their names at the present time; I know the parties very well by sight when I see them; there were two medical students. Q. Do you know whether any of these persons ac companied him when be went to Bermuda frir the pur pose of carrying out his plans? A. l do not know; I think one of them did; I have seen him since, how ever; I saw him withDr. Blackburn two or three days beiore I left ior New York. CJ. Did you notfwbile in Canada make tbe acquaint ance of Dr. Stuart Robinson, a Doctorof Divinity, who wasareugee from Kentucky? A. Yes sir; residing in Toronto; he has been editor of a paper in Ken tucky, which I think has recently been suppressed. Q. Was he or not present at any of these conversa tions of which you have spoken? A. He has been present when some of their schemes were being dis cussed: Ido not remember whether he was present whenthe yellow fever project was discussed or not, or whether it was when it was proposed to poison the Croton water, but on one of these occasions be was present. CJ. Will you state whether on that occasion he ap probated thescheme? A. He approved of it; heap- E roved of anything; hesaid tbat, anything tbat could edone under heaven, would be justifiable under the circumstances; that was his expression. CJ. He pronounced that as an exponent of diviriity? A. Yes sir; he is related to the Breckenridges of Ken tucky. I think. CJ. Is he not rega-ded as one of the most violent of all the traitors who have taken refuge in Canada? A. Yessir. CJ. Have you Seen John H. Surratt in Canada since the assassination ofthe President? A. Yes sir. CJ. On what day did you see him, do yqu remember? A. I think it was three or four days alter the assassina tion. CJ. Where at? A. I saw him in the street with Mr. Porterfield. CJ. Who is Mr. Porterfield? A. Mr. Porterfield is a Southern gentlemen made a British subject by a spe cial apt of'tbe Canadian Parliament. CJ. Heis'fromtheSouth? A. Yessir, he has been for some time a broker or banker there; he took charge of the St. Albans plunder from the Ontario Bank, when prematurely giveirup by Judge Coursol. , CJ. He is one ofthe intimate associates of the South ern traitors? A. Very Intimate with Thompson and Sanders. By Mr. Aiken.— Q, At wbat time didyou say you saw Surratt in Canada after the assassination? A. I think itmighthave been three or four days; itmighthave been a day more or less either way. By the Court.-^-CJ. Is the Captain Magruder you men tion ttre same who was formerly in the United States Navy? A. Yes sir, a brother of General Magruder of the* Bebel army. CJ. Can you state the full name of this Dr. Blackburn, and wnat State be is from? A. I do not know; I think he is from Mississippi, but I am not sure; I do not think I ever heardThis full name, Q. Was there only one Dr. Blackburn about there? A. That is all; it is the same party who was connected with the yellow fever project; there is no doubt about its being one and the same person. By Judge Holt.— CJ. Will you state your age, and where you were horn and educated? A. I afn twenty- eight years old; born in New York and educated there. Q. I understood you to say the other day that you were conscripted and iorced into the Rebel service? A. Yes sir. CJ. Arid you escaped on the first moment you had an opportunity? A. Yessir; after being detailed as Clerk in the War Department. CJ. Will you state whether or not, throughout, you bave not been, in your convictions and feelings, loyal to, the Government ofthe United States? A. I have always been so, CJ. Have you or not personal knowledge that Jeffer son Davis was tbe bead of the So-called Confederate. States and was called its President, and acted as such, controlling Its armies and civil administration? A. It was a matter of public riotoriety In the offices controlled by him, and I al.-o saw him. act as such. Q". In the War Department, when you were detailed as au officer he was fuliy recognized as such? CJ. Yes sir. Q,. I am not sure whether yon bave stated precisely, it you have not done it I w(ish you would state who were present at the conversation which you bad with Jacob Thompson early in April when he laid his band on tbe despatches? A. Mr. Surratt, General Carroll I think, myself, and I think Mr. Castleman, and I believe there were one or two others in the room sitting further back. 142 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. CJ, Can you state whether any of them participated in the conversation? A. General Carroll, of Tennes see, did. He was more anxioua that Mr. Johnson should be killed than anybodv else. Q. Did he so express himselt? A. Hedld; he said -that it the prick-louse was not killed by somebody he would kill him himself. Q. Did he refer by tbat expression to the then "Vice President, Johnson? A. Yes sir, that was his expres sion. CJ. What did that expression mean? , A. A word of contempt for a tailor; it is a tailor's louse; it is a word of contempt for a tailor^-at least Webster so defines it; that was tbe sense in which Carroll used it. Q.. Was it not the sense of those present, as you gath ered it from tbe conversation, that they regarded the enterprise of assassinating the President fully con firmed by tbe Rebel authorities at Richmond? A. Tbat was distinctly said. CJ. Will yon state whether or not you saw J. Wijkes Booth associating at any time with George N. Sand ers? A. I never saw Boothexceptononeday and even ing, and then he wasstrutting about the St. Lawrence Hall, asl have already said, and hewas in conversa tion with Sanders and Thompson; I saw them, talking with Booth, but I was not present at any conversation with either. CJ. Had J. Wilkes Booth, in Canada, in association with these men, any nickname, and, if so, what was it? A. I have heard him called ''Pet." Q. By whom? A. I do not distinctly remember; by several; I think by Thompson, and by Cleary I am sure. .CJ. In that circle of men you have mentioned you found him so-called? A. Yes sir: I can speak positively as to Clearv, and think also Mr. Thompson. Q,. This Stuart Robinson* D. D.. of whom you have spoken, is he not the editor of the journal called the True Presbyterian, in Kentucky? A. He was .an edi tor, but the paper has been suppressed, by order of tbe Commanding General of'that.Department, I believe. CJ. You haveheardso? A. I was told so. CJ. Were you in Canada at the time Kennedy was executed in Nejv York for having fired the city? A. I was. Q. Was his execution the subject of conversation among the men ol whom you have spoken? A. Yes sir, a great deal. CJ. Will you state whether or not in those conversa tions, the crime for which be was executed, firing the city of New York, was recognized as having been per formed by the authority of the Rebel Gobernment? A. Itwas by the direction of Mr. Thompson. jCJ. Did you learn that much from .Mr. Thompson himself? A. Yes sir, I think. I may say I learned it from Mr. Thompson, or at least by conversation in his presence. CJ. Kennedy was spoken of and recognized as an agent of the Rebel Government? A. Yes sir; Thomp son said Kennedy deserved to be hanged, and he was devilishglad be had been hanged, because he was a stupidfellowand had managed things very badly. -Q.-.On the ground off bis being abungler? , A. Yessir. By Mr. Aiken.— Did you ever meet more than one Surratt in Canada? A. No sir. Q. Was Surratt introduced to you as coming from Mississippi? A. No sir. Q. Was the place mentioned whence he came. A. I do not remember that itwas, but I was left with the impression that Surratt was lrom Baltimore:. I never heard that, and I do not know how. I gained the im pression, bLit I had an impression ofthat kind. Q. Did you ever hear o f any Surratts from MississiD- pi while you were there? A. No sir. CJ. Did you have a regular weekly salary from the Tribune or were you paid by tbe letter? A. I was paid by the letter. CJ. Whem did you board in Montreal? A. I boarded in Oraig street and in Monica street. Q. You did not board at the St. Lawrence Hotel? . A. Nosir; .all these parties I have named did not board there; some did; Mr. Sanders did not, and Mr. Tucker only part ot the time. CJ. Where did Jacob Thompson board? A. At St. Lawrence Hall. MONDAY'S PffiOCEEBINGS. The record of the, previous day having been read, the examination of witnesses was continued as fol- lows:^- Testimony of Rev. Wm. B. Evans. By Judge Advocate Holt.— The testimony of this witness was to the effect that he was well ac quainted with .J. Seed Jenkins; knew his general reputation to be that of a disloyal man. though in 1R(J1, and previous to that period be had pretended to bein favor of the Union; hadknowuhim to be open andout-spoken in his sympathy with the Rebellion; was slightly acquainted with the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd; about the first or second of March, while coming to Washington, the prisoner passed witness coming in the same direction, and entered the city just beiore witness; did not see the accused in the city on that occasion; neither saw him. return nor knew where h o stopped while in the city. On the cross-exam i nation of wftness.conducted by Mr, Clampitt, the iollowing, evidence was adduced:— Have , been acquainted with Mr. Jenkins about fifteen years: hepretendedto be a Union man iu 1861, but witness believed him to be a hypocrite; knew from his actions that he was opposed to the Government; those actions consisted in bis betting that the South would suc ceed, and that the country would go to rain; did* not hear him, use these expressions, but only heard from others tbat he had made use of them; did not know that he was a loyal man in 1863, , or that he at- ternpted to procure Union votes on the occasion of an election in Maryland; knew him to attempt to raise a disturbance at thepolls.in order to Jceep Union men from voting, in conseauence of which he was arrested. Testimony of T. B. Robey. Townley B. Robey, on being examined by Judge Ad vocate Hall, testified substantially as follows:-: Have known J. Seed Jenkins for several years; from my personal knowledge of his uniform con duct and conversation I have known him to be one of the most disloyal men iu the country, oppn and out spoken, in his hatred ot the Govern ment; heard him curse thePresident ofthe United States.'and say that old Lincoln offered him an office, but he would not holdtan office under such a damned Government. Cross-examined by Mr. Clampitt.— Have known Mr. Jenkins for four or five years; knew him to bea Union man and a Know-nothing until he abandoned the Union party, which he did immediately upon losing a negro servant, which he had held as a slave; never heard of any attempt on his part to secure Union votes in Washington by inducing citizens of Maryland to return to their residences, though, on one, occasion, in 1861, he hoisted a Union .flag; never had' any suit against Mr. Jenkins.'but he had com menced a suit against Andrew B.'Robey; wit n ess-seen in consequence of his arrest ior disorderly behavior on the occasion of an election in Maryland; the suit was for an alleged ials'e imprisoment. Testimony of John M. Thompson. John M.Thompson, on being examined by, Judge, Advocate Holt, testified that he had known Mr. Jen kins for mapy years; that lour years ago that gentle- roan was reported to be loyal, but that ior the last two years and six months bis reputation was the reverse ofthat, his alleged disloyalty beingof an open andout- spoken character; witness himself had beenloyajto +he Government throughout tbe Bebellion; witness, lived inthe fam-'y of, Mrs. Surrattior two years, and,, from .conversations ofthat lady, which were invari ably against the Government, he believed her to be disloyal. Cross-examined by Mr. Clampitt.— In 1861 and~ 1862 Mr. Jenkins was considered a Union man; in I8fi3he. was not; witness never knew of his coming to Wash-J ingtonat any time to procure the votes of Union citi- zens"of that Sfate who had moved here but^hadnot lost their residences in Maryland; atonetimeJen&ina raised a Union flag, but that was in rSRl, when hehad the reputation of being a loyal- man; witnesshad heard him say'that he hated the Government, but bad not hearahinn state any cause for his hate; in regard tothe emancipation policy in the State of Mayrland Jenkins said that it was all wrong; never heard him say that hewas as»good a Union man as there was in theState of Maryland, but that he was opposed to some of the acts of the Administration. ** By Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett.— CJ. Which side did hesay he would fight for ip case he was forced to fight? A. He .said he would go for the South. At the instance -of Mr. Ewing, counsel for the pri soner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd, who was not present at the opening of the Court, the following witness for the prosecution was recalled, and his cross-examination resumed:—, Re-cross-examination of Rev. W. B. Evans, Pastor of the Fiiteenth- Street New School Presbyterian Church (colored) of Washington, by Mr. Ewing.^I, am acquainted with the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd; I have seen him at the .Catholic Cliurch at Bryantown; it was in December, 1850, when I saw him there: was never introduced to the prisouer; saty him after that different times in Washington City, on the street and about the. hptels; I think I met hSin once in the National Hotel; think I saw' him last winter at the house, or going into the house of Mrs. Surratt; I could not say what time last winter I saw him, unless I referred to my i ournal; I never visited Mrs. Surratt's house; the house which I saw tbe pri soner enter was on H street. I think, betweeu Ninth aud Tenth or Eighth and Ninth streets; I suppose it was Mrs. Surratt's house; lasked a policeman. I be lieve, at the time, and also asked a lady standing on the pavement, whose house I was that, indicating the one into which saw tbe prisoner enter, and was told it was Mrs. Surratt's house: I coujd not positively .say whetber it was or not; do not recollect exactly "butweeri what streets the house was situated, though I think it was between the Patent office and the President's house; could not say whether itwas a two or three-story house: do not r- collect whether it stood out square- on.the pavement, or Stood .back; cannot say whether there was a portico TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON *- 143 In front; the house was qu the south side of n street ; I was riding down tbe street at the time; going to see Rev. Mr. Butler, of the Lutheran Church; I did not see him on that-day. but went to a prayer meeting at his church;. saw Mrs. Ward there: could not name any others that I saw at the church; 1 could not name others whom I saw on that day, except Mr*. Sophia Brussyand Mis-i Pumphrey; I stopped at the houses of those ladies on other occasions during last Winter; when detained in the city over night, I would stop at thehouse of Mrs. Brussy, who is mv wife's aunt- I saw Dr. Mudd entering Mrs. Surratt's house: he was dressed ip..dark colored cloihes and a soft felt bat: D have seen his lather within three years' on the road coming to this city: I mentioned tne fact of my seeing Dr. Mudd, tbe prisoner, on the road to Wash ington, to my wife only: the fact of seeing him go into Mrs. Surratt's house I mentioned to my lather- in-law; I ho'd a secret commission under the Gov ernment, and am a detective officer. Examination of Miss Fanny Mudd. By Mr. Ewing.— The prisoner is my brother. I am familiar with thewhereabouts ofthe prisoner during a portion of the time, from the 1st to the 5th of March last. Ontheist. which w.^ Ash Wednesday, my sis ter was takensick; on the 2d my brother, the prisoner, called at the house and breakfasted with us; on the 3d he came to thehousefrom his barn, where he had beep stripping tobacco, at about eleven or twelve o'clock in themorning. He took dinner and stayed till two o'clock when he went away, but returned about lour o'clock with some medicine for my sister. On tbe 4th of March hecameto dinner, and on the 5th be'visited us in the eveniugjn company with Dr. Blan ford. lam able to re collect these dates from the fact that the 1st of March was Ash Wednesday, which, among Catholics is aday of obligation to attend divine service. I am confident that tbe accused was not absent irom home during the- 1st and 5ih of March. I have been in the habit during the last four years of visiting my bi other's house frequently. I never beard of John H. Surratt being there. 1 heard of Booth being at the house once, that was about the 1st of last November. In 1861 there were three gentlemen who elent in the Sines around my bro;her's house, Mr. Jerry Dyer, An- rew Gwynn and Ben. Gwynn. Testimony of Mrs. Etna By Mndd. , By Mr. Ewing.— CJ. Where do you reside? A. In Charles county Maryland, at the house of the father of the prisoner, Dr. Mudd. CJ. State what you know as to the whereabouts of Dr. Mudd between the 1st and 5th of March last? A. Tbe 1st of March was A^h-Wcduesday. and we went down to church; on the 2d of March, Dr. Mudd was summoned to bis lather's house, and reached here be fore breakfast, and remained to see his sister; on Friday, the 3d, he came over to dinner about 12 o'clPck, and finding his sister much worse, he came over again in the evening to bring her some medicine; he came again on Saturday to dinner, and I think he warf there to dinner on Sunday also. CJ. Do you know Andrew Gwynn? A. I do; I have not seen him since the fall ot*i$G0; he was in tho habit of visiting at Dr. Mudd's fathers before that; I have not heard ofhim being at Dr. Mudd's house since I8cl. CJ. Have you heard of Captain Perry,. Lieutenant Perry, and John H. Surratt being there? A. I have not. v QJ. Have you ever known Confederate officers or sol diers to be about Dr. Mudd's house? A. No sir, I have been there rriyself very frequently si nee 1831. ' CJ. State whether you saw Dr. Mudd, the prisoner, on his way home from towards Bryantown the day after1 tbe assassination of the President? A. Yes; I was standing at the window and saw him' pass; there was nq one with him. Cross-examined by Judge Bingham. CJ. Wberedidyoufirstseehim onSaturday,? A. He rode by the, house towards Bryantown, I think between land 2 c^clock, and when he came back I expect it was 4 o'clock. CJ. Do you know of your own knowledge that Dr. Samitel Mudd was at home on the 1st of March? A. I do not. CJ. And of your own knowledge do ypu know that he was at home until he came to see your sister the next day at noon? A. I do not. Testimony of Charles Dnell. For the prosecution, by Judge Holt.— CJ. Where do you reside? A. In Washington. Q, B^ave you recently been in North Carolina? A. 5res„iri Morebead City. CJ. State, while there, if you picked up a letter writ ten in cipher? A. I did pick up the letter that I now see before me; I found It on the 2d of May, at the Government wharf, at Morebead City; floating inthe Water, and I subsequently deciphered it; it Is addressed ©X.W. Wise, and is as follows:— Washington. April 15,1865.— Dear John— I am happy tqinrorm you that Pet has done his work well. He Is safe, and old Abe is in hell. Now. sir, all eyes are upon you. You must bring Snerrnan. Grant is in the hands of old Gray ere this. Kedshoes showed a lack of nerve In Seward's, case, but fell back in good order. Johnson must come. Old.Crook has him in charge. 25?,, w/"tllMit5POtlier8, oath aud you willhavenodim- wiLi ,lU basal* and enjoy the trust of our leaders. ^5- « A Vfie meetir)e last night; AH were bent on £-« ? In,ff out the programme to the letter. The rails tht fJJ /Pn^V^T S!d L • alwft3's behind, lost }i,l L£J«nt %ly Pointi KowI say again, the lives of ™»^ve offic?rs a"d the life ofthe South depends upon the carrying this programme Into effei t. Num ber two will give you this. It is ordered no more letters shall be sent by mail. When you write sign no real name, and send by some of our Iriends who are coining home. We want you to write us how the news was received there. We receive great encouragement from all quarters. I hope there will be no getting weak in tbe knees. I was in Baltimore yesterday. Pet had not got there vet. lour folks are well and have heard from yon. Don't lose your nerve. o. B. No. 5. Q. In what business were you engaged at the time ? A. In driving piles; I found this letter when I was at work. CJ. Do you know anything of tbe person the letter Is addressed to ? A. No: I know nothing about bim, and could hear nothing of bim. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— CJ. You state that you deciphered that letter; did you know any thing of the key to the cipher? A. A gentle- manberetoldmehe had seen it before; we found that the first letter was" W," and we supposed it was dated at Wilmington, and taking that as a key we tried the letter, butfound itdid not come out; we then took the date at, Washington, and with thatcommencedmaking itout; I had no acquaintance with the cipher myselr until r came to Washington. Q. You state that yuu found the letter in the river; wasiimuch^inrred? A. Itdid not seem to have been in the water a long time, and was very little blurred. Q. Was anybody with you at the time you picked the letter up? A. Yes sir; A.M. Ferguson. Testimony of James Ferguson. By Judge Holt.— Q. State whether you have re cently been Ht Morehead City, N. C? A. I left there a week ago Wednesday, in company with Mr. Duell. CJ. State whether or not you were present when a cipher letter floating in the water was picked up. A. Yes, I was the one who discovered the letter, and called the attention of Mr. Duell to it; he picked it up; this was on the 1st or 2d of May last. Testimony of John S. Barr, for Defense. By Mr. Doster.— Look at the prisoner, Atzeroth, and see it you know him. A. I do; all I know about bim is that ho came to my shop one evening, at the Navy Yard, and I went to Pope's restaurant with him; we had several drinks together, and he then took supper with me, and afterwards we went back to tbe restau rant and had more drinks, alter which he took his burse and rode off; this was between tbe 10th and 13th of April. Q. Do you not remember that it was on the I2th of April? A. It was somewhere about that time, I had some work done that day, which I have charged on my book here as on the 12th of April. Testimony of Betty Washington, CoI'd. By Mr. Ewing.— State where Dr. Mudd was on the 1st of March last? A. Hewas down at the tobacco bed preparing it ready to sow; that was on Ash Wednes day; he staidthere until about dinner, when Mr. Blandford came, and they went into dinner; it was raining that evening, and he staid in and I did not see him go out any more that evening. CJ. Where was he the next day? A. The next day, Thursday, he was cutting brush, and was there all day; I went out, too, and was loading the cart. CJ, Did you see anything of him on Friday, the 3d ot March? A. On Friday(he was stripping tobacco, took dinner at his lather's and came back about night. CJ. Did you see him on Saturday, the 4th of March? A., He took breakfast at home: in the afternoon be went to the Post Office at Beantown, and came home about night. Q. Did you see him on Sunday? A. He went to church and was at home at night. CJ. Do you know where he. was on the last day ot February? A Yes; he was at work at the brush. CJ. While you were at work at Dr. Mudd's, did you ever hear or see John H. Surratt? A. Not there. Q. Would you bave noticed him if he had been there? A. If he had been there I would have known the name. a ,B CJ. Do you know Mary Semmes.and, if so. state what the colored people about there think of her as a truth- teller? A. They all give her a bad name as a story teller' Cross-examined by Judge Holt.— a. On tbe 2d of March Dr. Mudd took breakfast at home did he? A. Yes* he took bis breakfast at home, and he took his dinner and supper at home too that day. Bv Mr Ewing.^-Are you certain he took breakfast at bis house the day after Ash- Wednesday. Question objected to by Judge Bingham, and objection sustained. 144 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Testimony of Wm. ». Wood. By Mr. Clampitt.— CJ. State your bffieial position. A. I am Superintendent Of the Old Capitol Prison. Q. State whetber you are acquainted with A. Z. Jen kins, who was a witness in this case. A. I have kfibwn him live' or six years ratherintiinately; he has always been an opponent ofthe Democracy; he was with the Know Nothings, and also one of the Union party when itwas formed- in 1361: he was consi dered one of the most reliable men in the district; in < 1S62 he refused to vote for Holland on the ground that he was under obligations to go for Calvert, who owned thatsection of t.e country, and he said he, believed him to be a good Union man. CJ. State whether he d.'d riot labor and urge his friends to labor ana expend his money f.eely to keep Maryland inthe Union up to 18S2? A. Yes. CJ. You say he went for Calvert; in the election you speak of did he not^go against Harris? A. Yes. he did; Calvert was considered by some a Union man; Harris was considered a Democrat of the Secession school. CJ, Did not Mr. Jenkins remark that if Calvert did not run he would support Holland? A. He agreed to do that. CJ. Did not you receive certain information from Mr. Jenkins which you submitted to the War Depart ment and Which finally resulted in the capture of Booth? A. I received some information from Jen kins, which I forwarded to Judge Turner. CJ. Did you consider that as a loyal act? A. I was Satisfied that he would give me the information if he had it, when I started out. , CJ. Doyou believe Mr. Jenkins to be a consistent loyal man? A. Ido:Ido not believe be isafriend'of the Adriiinistration, on account of the negro question, but outside ofthat lieis a loyal man. Cross-examined by Judge .Ko't:— CJ. Has not Mr. Jenkins been for some time past bitterly hostile to the Government; and if that is so. do you not con sider that as disloyalty? A. I -have had very little to do with him lately, and have not regarded him as sound as I did formerly; inthe last eledion he voted- for Harris, I believe, and associated, with that sort of men. Testimony of John Acton. John Acton testified that he lived about a mile and a quarter from Bryantown, and that on tbe day of theassassinationTiesaw Dr. Mudd going toward Bry antown, riding a grey horse; there was no one with him at .the time he first saw him. but another man who was riding behind him overtook him, and they rode on together: in about three-quarters of an hour he saw tbat person riding back by bimself. The witness stated, on cross-examination, that be could notidantify Harold, certainly, as the person he saw on that occasion. He looked very like him, but he did not notice particularly the man so much as he did the horse. The horse be rode was a bay. When be saw the person coming back lie was going up the road, in the same, way he bad come down. This was about three miles from Bryantown. Marion IL. McPherson. A witness, called by Mr. Ewing, testified that he lived about three-quarters of ami1 e from Bryantown, arid he was at Bryantown on the day alter the murder, frqim about two o'clock till four P. M. While there he Jieard that a man by the name of Boyd, who bad killed Caytain Watkins, had murdered the Secretary of State. He did not learn who had assassinated the President, although be made inquiry of citizen7: and soldiers while there. Was inBean's s'ore and heard the murder talked over . Saw Lieut, Dana ibere, and on Monday saw him sitting outside with Dr. George Mudd, with whom he was speaking. Knows the repu tation of Dr. George R. Mudd to be that of a good Union man as any in the United States. The reputa tion of D. J. Thomas for veracity is bad. John McPherson, Called by Mr. Ewing, testified that he wasatBrvan- townonthe day alter the murder, from two until Beven o'clock; heard much general conversation about the assassination, but did not hear till Monday that Booth was the assassin; saw Lieutenant Dana on Mon day morning, lu company with Dr. George Mudd; did not hearthe conversation; the reputation ol* Daniel J. Thomas for veracity is bad; the reputation of the pri soner, Mudd, IS that of an honorahle man and good citizen. Cross-examination.— Never heard he was charged with false sweariug. and would not say that he would not believe him under oatb. John T. Langdon, Called by Mr. Ewing, testified that he wasatBrvan- townontheday alter the -assassination of the Presi dent; heard much conversation on the subio6t, but did not hear till Monday who was charged with the mur der. Peter Trotter. Examined by Mr. Ewing.— LJveB In the village of Bryantown; was there tbe day after tbe murder and heard it talked of; asked some soldiers who did It. and thev said it was done by Boyd, whomurdered Captain Watkins; tbe reputation of D. J. Thomas for veracity Is very bad: wouid nothelir've him under oath. Cross-examined by Judge Holt.— Have' always been loyal to theGovernment, and desired it to succeed iri putting down the Bebellion; Mr. Thomas is very unpo pular in tho neighborhood; hene^er heard him speak in favor ofthe Rebellion; have never taken f he oath of allegiance; called on a captain about three weeks ago. to take it,, but he had no blanks; took the oath in Bal timore once to p:et my goods out; at that time my sym pathies were with the Bebe:lion; have never been en gaged in blockade-running; don't knbw whether I should believe Thomas it he were speaking in a court of justice asrainst the Rebellion or not. By Mr. Ewing.— Before the war Thomas' veracity bore the same reputation it has now; I have heard him talk as badly as some of the Bebels, but at the begin ning of the war he had the reputation of beingaloyal man. By the Court.— Am a native of Scotland, and have .never been naturalized here; havevoted three times in this country, but notiOr thelast two years; the first timelvoted was in a Presidential election. and alter- wards for local officers; do not think I voted upon fehe adoption of the amendment to the Constitution of Maryland; do not know why I didn't vol e. Testimony of Beujamin Gardiner. Saw Dr. Mudd at church on the Monday after the assassination, and then saw him in conversation with his neighbor. ThatwasaboutlOo'clockinthemorning. Testimony of Thomas EJavis. Have lived at ,Dr. Mudd's house since the 9th of January; Dr. Mudd was at home on the 1st of March; lie came to see witness, who was sick; it was Ash Wednesday, and he said he could give me no meat; be came to see me on the 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th and 5th day of March twice a day: he came every day while I was sick, in the daytime. Mr. Ewing then offered in evidence the following telegram:— Montkeal, June 2d, 18(55.— I left Washington on Monday evening, March 26tb, and have not bqen there since. You can have my testimony before the Ameri can Consul here, if required. JOHN MCCULLOUGH. Testimony of John 5>avis. Live in Prince George county, Maryland; Dr. Mudd, was at home at 10 o'clock in the morning, on the 3d. of March last; my son was sick; Iwent to see him and found Dr. Mudd there. The Court then went into secret session, and finally adjourned until lo A. M. to-morrow. Tuesday's Proceeding's. Washington, June 6.— The reading of the previous day's record occupied the Commission until l o'clock, when the body took a recess until 2. at which hour they reassembled. D. J. M.ddleton. Clerk of tbe United States Supreme Court, being examined by Mr. Ewing, testified that Marcus P. Norton, a witness who bad been before' the Court, argued a motion beiore tbe Supreme Court of the United States on the 3d day of March last. Tbo object iu calling this witness was to fix a certain day. in regard to which Norton, a witness, had previously testified. Mr. Ewing. counsel for the prisoner Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. then addressed the Court as follows :— By reason of inlormation which I have received since the wit ness Daniel J.Thomas was last upon the stand. I ask the privilege of the Court to recall this witness ior the purpose of lurther cross-examination in regard to a singlepoint. I wish toshow that this witness, whose testimony is of vital importance in the case, gave that testimony from corrupt motives. I expect to show through five or six of his neighbors that by his own declarations, made since he appeared upon the stand tor the prosecution, he did it from the hope and expectation of a laige reward. To be more precise, I expect to prove that he Stated to EH J.' Watson, on the, 1st of June, that he bad testified here, and that Dr. Mudd, would surely he con victed; that he asked Watson fo*? a certificate ofthe fact that be was the first person Who gave infor mation which led to the arrest of the accused, and that he then stated to Watson that if he could get such a certificate fiotn him and, others he would get a reward of twenty-five thousand dollars, because of the information leading to the arrest and because ofthe factor conviction. I expect to show* further, that subsequently, on the same day. in conversation at Wm. Watson's house, near Hdrsehead, with John R. Richards. Benj. J. Naylor, George Lyhch, Lemuel Watson and Wm. Watson, he stated to them that he wished them to give him certificates as being tbe first person who gave information which led to the arrest Of Dr. Mudd; that hehad been present here and testi fied, and that Dr Mudd would shortly he convicted, and that if they would give him. the certificates he de sired ho would receive a reward of ten thousand dol lars by reason of his efforts in the case. I wish to show TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT; WASHINGTON. 145 lurther, that subsequently, upon a magistrate of tbe neighborhood. Mr. James W. Richards, riding up; Thomas, in the presence of these last named gentle-- men, submitted to tbat gentleman thequestion as to whether; uponihls getting these certificates, he would not be entitled to the reward often thousand dollars, in case Dr. Mudd should be convicted. It seems to me that if the witness stood before this Court fair ou all the testimony which has preceded this evidence, it should justly go to diminish the weight of his testi mony in the" mi nds of the Court, by showing that he wastes Hying under the hope of a large reward: and In the lignt of the evidence that has been given that hemanufacturedalie to procure the arrest and con viction of Dr. Mudd, being actuated by a mercenary motive. Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett stated that tbe Srosecution would interpose no objection to the evi- ence. The following witness was then called:— Re-cross-examination of I>. J. Thomas. By "Mr. Ewing.— I was at Wm. Watsori's, near Horse- ¦ - — ?sent Geo. head. -on .Thanksgiving day. the first of the present month, with John R. Richards, Benj. J. Naylor, Geo, Lyncb.Lemuel Watson and Wm. Watson, when Jas.W. Richards, a magistrate, rode up; I did not say to Mr. James W. Richards that I had been asking tbe gentle men present for a certificate as proof of the Fact that I was tne first person who gave information leading to the arrest- of Dr, Samuel A. Mudd; ueitherdld Isay I had stated to them that Dr. Mudd would be convicted, or that if they gave such a certificate, and Dr. Mudd should be con victed, I would receive a reward© t' $19,000; I did not say to any of the persons in whose company i then was what I have just denied saying to Mr. Richards; I never expected a cent for what I might do inthiscase as a witness; I did not tell Richards that I was tbe person who gave the notice which led tothe arrestof Dr. Mudd; I never told anyone thatl told the gentleman referred to that the expression in Washington City in regard to Mudd was tbat he would' "go ;up;" I also asked their opinion as to whether I would be entitled to any portion of tbe reward in the event pf Dr. Samuel Mudd being convicted, but never asked them tor a certificate of the fact that I was firsA to give them information con cerning Mudd; theother day I- was telling John D. Koran and Daniel B. Moran about tbe conversation between Dr.. Mudd and. myself- previous to Dr.iMudd's arrest, when John D. Moran said that I told him about that beiore; I had forgotten having told him: Moran said that I told him thatbetbretheassa sination ofthe President, but I have no recollection of it: I never said to Eli J. Watson that I wanted him to certify that I gave the information which led to Dr. Mudd's arrest, or that I was entitled to the reward of twenty-live thousand dollars lor giving that information. ¦ Testimony of Jaone^ A. ESJebards. By Mr.' Ewing.— I am acquainted with the witness, D. J, Thornas; Was with him. and others in the drove- yard of William Watson, at Horsehead, Prince George county, on the 1st of the present month! he stated that he had called oh William Watson arid B. J. iSaylpr for a Certificate tbat he was entitled to a portion of the reward offered for the arrest of Booth and his accom plices; that he had insormed the officers of Dr. Mudd's arrest, and that if they would certify to that fact, he would be entitled to the reward; that if Dr. Mudd wag convicted he would receive ten thousand dollars; the certificate he wanted was that he informed them con cerning Dr. Mudd's arrest or of his having been ar rested: be did not certify to having led to the arrest; the reputation of D. J. Thomas in the community Where he lives is very bad; if I believed he hadauypre- judice or any money at stake, I would not believe him under oath; his reputation for veracity beiore the war was pretty much the same as it is now. Cross-examined, by Judge Bingham— The day this Conversation took place at' William Watson's was on Thursday; when I rode up , Lemuel Watson, remarked tome, "lam glad you have come: you are a justice oi the peace; Daniel says he is erititled to so, much re ward, and I want you to say whether be is, entitled to it;" I don't recollect what I said at the time to Thomas; he applied to Watson for a certificate that he had inforrtied thefca of Dr. Mudd's arrest; that if he %buld get this" certificate .tie could getaportiQn of the- TewardVor words equivalent: if he had said. V If you give me a certificate that I informed you of Dr. Mudd's arreSt. he would be entitled to a reward;" that would have been words equivalent; we told him We thought lie was entitled to 'twenty thousand dol lars; we meant it as a joke and told him so afterwards, put did" not at the time; he replied that he did not want a certificate of me, or words to that effect; he told me be did not want me to swear to £.,,Jie lor him to get twenty thousand dollars. -*Q. Dtdfn't yon swear a little while ago that you had >toldjb£m he had better take twenty thousand dollars? rA. If it did I recall it; what I Ilk ended to say was. that •I told him and Watson told him tbat-he was entitled to twenty thousand dollars, but that was a Joke; I did not •know that he was entitled to anything; I have had* no connection at all with the Rebellion, and bave not sym pathised with it; I have been all the time during the Rebellion in Charles and Priuce George counties, keep ing school. By Mr. Ewing.— I have been a hearty supporter of all ft-hevmeasures of the Government to suppress-the Rebellion; Mr. Thomas was not a hearty supporter of the Government in isei; I met him on the way from school during that year, and he stated that hewas gpingdown to jpin the Southern army, and when Beaurpgard came over he was gofnsr to come back and hang a man. Thomas-P. Smith; Thomas was not a loyalman at the beginning of the war. Mr* lowing at this point introduced in evidence trie general order ot the War Department of -20th April. 1865, offering one hundred thousand dollars re ward for trie arrest of Booth aud his accomplices, and liberal jrewards for information leading tothe arrest ot anyof theparties. Tes$i-nyony «»f John F. Davis. By Mr. Ewing.— I was -at the house of Dr. Mudd,. the prisoner, the Tuesday following the assassination of ihe President; I went to the field and informed bim, of the fact that Lieutenant Lovett and a party of soldiers had come to arrest him; I came up with riirhtothe house, and was there met, by Cieorge Mudd; fre met Dr. Sam Mudd just at the end ofthe kitchen. .Q. State what Dr. George Mudd said to Dr. Sam. Mudd. Judge Bingham— I object to that question. Mr. Ewing (the witness having retired from the room)stated that his object was to rebut the testimony introduced by tbe prosecution, tbat Dr. Mudd denied that there had been any persons.at his house on that morning. The defense had already proved in a round about way that the prisoner had informed Dr. George Mudd that two suspicious persons, thad. been at his house on Sathfaay morning, and requested him to communicate the fact to the military authorities, which he had done, and he proposed to show by this witness 'that JDr. George Mudd rib w informed him that, having given information as he requested, tnedetec- tiVe had come for the purpose of questioning him on thissflbject; and as Samuel Mudd, knowing tbe.fact that information had already been communicated from him through Dr. George Mudd, of the visit to his house of two suspicious persons, it was unnatural to suppose that the prisoner would' then, as stated by one of the witnesses tor the prosecution, have denied tbat any persons had been at his house, " Judge Bingham said the purpose was' to bring iri the declaration ofthe third person tothe accused; which was utterly incompetent. The objection was sustained by the Court and the witness recalled. Q. State whether Dr. Samuel Mudd betrayed any alarm when you informed him. that the detectives bad come to his house. A. None that I know °1» he mani fested no unwillingness to go to the house, and came right up there with me. Testimony Of t. S. Orme. By Mr. Ewing.— I am acquainted with the witness, J. D. Thomas) I know his reputation in the community in which he lives for veracity: I never heard him tell any story iu my life of any length that he did nottell agood many things not true: .1 doi not know any man down there who would believe him in anything he would undertake. to, tell: I bave known him since be fore he was grown: in any matter in which he was pre judiced; I would not believe bim under oath, and would hardly believe him.anyiaow> • Cross-examined by Judge Holt.— I am loyal te the Government to the best'Of my ability: I have al ways wished that the Union might be sustained; I never wanted to see two Governments; I always thought the North w By Mr. Ewing.— I did not see my brother, Dr. Sa muel Mudd, on tbe 1st day .of March, but I tbipk.be stayed hit home on-the 2d ofvWBaffchI-think became to my father's bouse tosee a sick sister; on the 3d of March he was sent lor, also h at 10 o'clock, to go to, my father, and took dinner with us\ab©.ut two o'clock; he came back again thesame day, and brought some medicine; Invent to his house kgainthe same night, and brohght some medicine over; on tbe 4th of Mar,eh I also saw him; tbe distance from m-y father's house to tbe Navy Yard bridge. Washington, .Is., between twenty-seven and thirtyriiiles; Ido not know thatmy brother, Dr. Mudd, ever owned a.carr.iase of any de scription, and if he had I should have, known tt; my father does'ndt own a buggy, or a rockaway, of any de scription? he owns a large double carriage, as large as any of the hacks you see in the city. - Testimony of Dr. J. II. Blanclford. By Mr. Ewing.^=A. I Saw Dr. Mudd at home on the 1st and 5th of March; on the lst.it his house, making a tobacco bed, and on the 5th at church; Dr Mudd does im TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS ATM WASHINGTON. noft'ownabuggy .neither does1 his father a buggy or a rockaway, hut owns a large lamily carriage. Testimony of Dr. ASlen. • By Mr. Ewing.— A/ Dr. Mudd was at my bouse on the evening of tbe 23d of March last; he Carrie In with H. A. Clark and a Mr. Gardiner (I do riot know his firSt name) who lives out- in Dr. Mudd's neighborhood: they came at near eight -o'clock in the evening, arid stayed till between twelve and one o'clock that night: there were several persons in there; I fixed the date atthe 23d of March because i remember that on that day a tornado swept over the city, and 'a negro boy was killed; I had seen Dr. Mudd ortce before that time; I was introduced to him by Mr. Clark, I think in the early part of 1864; I had not seen him since that time, and these are the only two occasions I think I saw him. Testimony of Dr. Clark. By Mr. Ewirig.— I saw Dr. Mudd, the prisoner,, with Mr. James Gardiner and others at my house in the lattpr part of March; they cameto my store between 6 and 7 o'clock, and went tb my house to tea, and after tea went round to Dr. Allen's office, and remained until between 12 and' l o'clock; there were some ten or a dozen persons there: Dr. Mudd remained at my house' that bight arid left the next morning; alter breakfast he and Gardiner, went off together; they roomed together at my house' that night; I have riot sfeen' him since till yesterday; Ido not Know J. Wilkes Booth, John H. Surratt, or Wm. Welchrnan. and did not see any of them at my house or Dr. Allen's that night; Dr. Mudd was not out of my sight from the time he came to the store that afternoon until he wept to bed at my house that night; tbe only way I fix the date is by a storm that day in Which a negro boy was killed; we were playing cards that evening, at Dr. Allen's. Two witnesses were called relative to the confession ofthe prisoner Arnold, while on the'wayfrom Fortress Monroe to Baltimore, but tbeir examination was not continued further than putting preliminary questions. Mr. Ewing stated that several important witnesses had been subpoenaed and would without doubt be pre sent to-morrow, but that no further witnesses on be half of tbe defense were now present. Mr. Aiken remarked tnat there were two or three Witnesses he desired to examine still in defense of Mrs. Surratt, but that if they did not appear before the wit nesses for the other prisoners had all been examined. he would not ask (or any delay but would be ready at any.time to sum up in ber .defense. , The President of the Court notified counsel that, in accordance with the unifortmpraoticepf courts-martial i hey would be required to present their arguments in writing. , TheJudge Advocate-General alsostated, In, order to guara' counsel agairist unnecessary delay, that, followr ing the usual course in courts- martial, no opening would be made ou the part ofthe Government. Argu ments on behalf ofthe accused would be made, to which a reply would be made on behalf of the Govern ment, and no further arguments allowed. Mr. Aiken and Mr. Ewing remarked that they would prefer tbat the Government should, in advance, indicate its own theory in respect to the accused. The-Judge Advocate- General replied that their general course of examina tion would indicate that. General Hunter stated that hereafter the hour of meeting ofthe Court would be eleven, o'clock Instead often. ¦ • i ¦ Tbe Court then adjourned. '¦¦ ¦ , , > WEDNESDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. Washington, June 7.— The record of the previous day was read,1 arid the Commission then went into secret session, and after a short time tbe doors, werere- opened. After considerable delay, In consequence of the non-attendance pr witnesses/the testimony pro ceeded as follows :— Re-Examination of Geo. Boose (Colored.) By Mr. Ewing.-The day In regard to which I testi fied previously as the one On which I met the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd , ou a byroad, near my house, was Easter Saturday, the day after the assassination; from the point where I crossed the main road I could not see the whole of that by-road: if anybody had been traveling along the main road Witt* Dr. Mudd, the per son would have been very near me when! crossed the road. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— Did notsay that I saw Dr. Mudd when he turned off the main road and not having seen him then could not say that there wasnoperson withhim. Testimony ofK,f. Skinner (Colored). By ^Mr. Ewing.-Illve^n Charles county, Maryland. and have been the slave of Mrs. Thomas, mother of Daniel J. Thomas, whom I have known for thirty years; his reputation as a truth-teller is bad, but I could not say that I would not believe him on his oath; have beard gentlemen say that they would not believe him on his oath; when the war broke out be was not a loyal man; since then he has been changeable. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingh rim.— Have not heard any one since the 'commencement of the pre sent trial speak of Thomas as a man who eouldhot be believeoon oath ; did not hear any gentleman say that he was not to be believed on oath in a court of justice. , . _, There being no further witnesses present, Mr. Ewing-stated that there, remained to be called, in Mudd's case, thirteen witnesses, none Of whom lived more than twenty-four miles from Washington.- He presumed that thesubpeenas of the witnesses had mis carried, as hewas informed late last evening that a number of them had stated that they had nptbeen subpoenaed.' Assistant Judge-Advocate Burnett said' tbat the subpoenas in each case had'been promptly issued alnd sent to General Augur's Head-quarters, witb the direc tion of the Secretary of War that they be served forth with. The Commission then took a recess ,until two o'clock, at wh ich hour the body reassembled. Testimony of Jobn W. Wharton. ByMr. Ewing.— I live in Baltimore; am engaged at Fortress Monroe, on tbe outside of the fort; the prisoner, Samuel Arnold, was in my employment as a clerk from the 2d to the 17th of April, the day of his arrest; during that period I was absent only three days; the prisoner performed bis duties regularly and faith fully during the time he was employed by me: I re ceived a letter from tbe prisoner about the latter part of March, beiore he entered into mv employ. CJ. Did he say anything in that letter in regard to his former occupation? Aesistant Judge- Advocate Bingham objected to the question as irrelevant. The objection was sustained. Mr. Ewing then moved that tbe translation of tbe cipher letter alleged to have been found in the dock ot Morebead city, North Carolina, be stricken from tbe record for the twofold reason that it bore upon its face an evidence that it was fictitious, and that upon the filainest rule or evidence it was wholly inadmissible, oasmuch as the letter was in cipher^ and the hand writing liadnot been identified, and it had not been shown to have been addressed to, or been in tbe pos-- session of anybody connected witb or charged to bave been connected with the conspiracy. The rule in re gard to declarations in cases of conspiracy was that they might be admitted where they were declarations of one ofthe couspiratbrs and that where they are the declarations of aconspirator they must accompany some act of tbe conspiracy. Mr. Ewing read fromBenaye, page 289, and stated further that the contents of the letter had not been shown to be declarations of anyone of the conspira tors, but were entirely unconnected with the pubjept under investigation, and were, therefore, inadmissi ble. The motion had not been made sooner by the speaker, owing to the fact that he was not in the court room when the letter was presented, aud was not in formed of its presentation until to-day. (The letter referred to has been published.) Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham stated that It Was alleged in the charge and specifications that thla conspiracy was entered into by the parties Darned, and by others unknown. He cited instances in which the declarations of parties who were neither Indicted nor on trial were admissible as far as those declarations had a bearing upon cases of conspiracy, and thepri^ci- file was well settled that a letter written and never dfr Ivered was admissible ou a trial ot conspiracy. Thft letter in question would not probably aifect the ac cused at thebar. but it Bhould not be excluded from the Court pn that account. The speaker contended that a sufficient foundation had been laid to justify the introduction 6f the letter,, as It had beeh shown that Booth plotted the assassina tion or the President, with the agents of the Rebellion in Canada, who weighed him out the price of blood; that it fell to the lot; of one of the conspirators to go to Washington and to strike a murderous blow in aid o* tbeBebelllon; that another was ordered togo to New- berri, N.C.. and that this infernal letter was picked up In the vicinity of Newbem, arid the fact tbat itwas written by aconspirator was patent on its face. Had the letter been iound in the pocket bi Booth, who would say that it would not have been admissible la evidence aaainst him, and against every one else con spiring with him1 in this bluody wbrk ? ' After further argument, the commission decided not to Sustain the motion of Mr. E.ving. Testimony of Miss Minnie Pole. ¦ By Mr. Ewing.— I am acquainted with the prisoner Arnold; saw him on- the 20th ot March, in an omnibus going to Hopkstown, i.nd the 27th at his uncle's, on the occasion of a party there; saw him again on the 28th at witness' house, near Hookstown. Judge Advocate Holt stated that having learned that the defense would not call any further witnesses | with a view to Impeach the character of the witness TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 147 Ibr the prosecution, Lewis J. Weichman, he would now call several witnesses for the prosecution. Testimony of John Ryan. By Judge Advocate Holt.— Have been acquainted with Lewis J, Weichman for nearly a year, though not intimately, merely haying occasional conversa tions with him. as I met him on the street; his repu tation for veracity and uprightness has always been good; from my knowledge of his character, 1 would Mieve him under oath, or if, not under oath; do not ieve he would tell a falsehood; I recollect a con versation which took place between him. and myself About the time of tbe evacuation of Bichmond; my Impression is that during the conversation he re joiced at the prospect of a restoration of tbe Union; have no recollection that he ever expressed any other , than loyal sentiments. .Cross-examined by Kr. Eakin.— Cannot remember any conversation with Weichman on political sub jects prior to the evacuation ot Richmond, qfber than that of which I have spoken; do not recollect ever having heard him express any other than Union sen timents; he never represented to me that his relation with the War Department was of a confidential nature; never heard anytuing said against, his character for honesty and veracity. Examination of Frank Statt. By Judge Holt.— I have known Lewis J. Weichman about sixteen months; his. reputation as an honest, truth-telling man is very good indeed, as far as I know it; we were both in the public service in the same oifice; he bore an excellent reputation for loyalty there: he was always outspoken and frank in his friendship tor-the Government, as tar as I knew; he was connected with a military volunteer organization for the deiense of Washington. v Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— I made my ac- Sualntance house often at night, and don't know whether Mrs. Surratt was able to read and sew by gas-light or not. CJ, Can you state whether Weichman gave himself up alter the assassination, or whether he was arrested and taken to the police office. Question objected to by Colonel Burnett as not legitt- m ate to cross-examination. ¦ Q. Did you accompany Weichman to Canada. Question objected to by Colonel Burnett lor thesame reason as r.bove. Q. Who were tbe first parties who entered Mrs. Suiv ratt!s house the night after the assassination. ; Colonel Burnett. You need not state tnat. Q. State uyou have any knowledge of John H. Sur ratt being in this city sinca,the3d of. April? A. None. CJ. Did you see Weichm'an at three o'clock Saturday i m ruing, April 15th? A. I did. CJ. Where was he? Colonel Burnett— All this is outside a proper exami nation. Mr. Aiken stated that the counsel for the defense had not objected to any testimony, legal or illegal, sought to be introduced by tho Government, and they claimed tbe same liberality in introducing testimony tending to shield the accused irom the crimes with which tbev were charged. Colonel Burnett replied that -the rebutting evidence, as to this point, was commenced by the Government upon the staiemeutof the counsel for. Mr3. Surratt tnat h:s evidence for impeaching tbe character ©f Weichman wa3 closed; he denied that ihe Govern ment had introduced any evidence hot legal or legiti mate. Mr. Ewing said that with the consent of the Judge Advocate, he proposed to putispme questions to this witness, as a witness for the deiense. Colonel Burnett assented, and the examination was contimud by Mr. Ewing: I know a Mr. Jarboe: I do not know whether his name is Judson or not: I never saw him at Mrs. Sur ratt's house or heard of his, being there; I never knew the prisouer, Dr. Mudd, to go Lbereor heard of his being at the house. Q. State whether Weichman gave himself up after the assassination of the President. Question objected to by Colonel Burnett. Mr. Aiken had been excluded from asking tlie question because he had stated that he had close his evidence upon this point and he desired now to see whether tne Court would allow the sanae list of questions to be turned over to the counsel for another prisoner and in no Way affi cted by the testimony and put to the witness. Mr. Ewing declared the .reprimand as unnecessary and exceedingly out of place. It was net the business ot LheCurt to know where be got his, questions, and the Assistant Judge-' Advocate had stepped beyond (the proprieties of his position when he undertookto get that iniormatiou; -He wouidk, however, state that the questions were written by himself originally and handed by him to Mi'. Aiken, who was examining the witness. ' Col. Burnett said that Mr, Ewing was only permitted to make tho witness bis own by hi3 courtesy, and he new withdrew his consent. j L.dge Holt remarked, , tbat the witness had been placed in thevhands of Mr.JGwingas his own witness, and he doubLeu the right now to withdraw his con sent. Judge Bingham made the further objection of the Incompetency 'or'the testimony, till the foundation had been laid, of asking the question first of Mr. Weich man himself. , ,,_,_« The objection was sustained by the Court. ¦qT Did ycu go with Weichman to Canada and back? A. I did; he appeared to be a good deal excited; he was much excited the morning after the murder; tho first persons whp entered Mrs. Surratt's house on the Saturday after the murder were McDevitt, Clark and others, of the Metropolitan Police; It was about two o'clock in the morning; I think Weichman opened the door to let the men in; 1 did not seo whether he was dressed ot not; I took Weichman down myself 148 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. s to Superintendent Richardson the morning after; he did not express himself as wishing to' be delivered up. > Testimony of Jas. Mclievit*. By Col. Burnett.— I went to Mrs. Surratt's house with other olflcers, about 2 o'clock the night after the mur der; a lady put her head out of one of the upper win dows and asked who was there; wP asked it Mrs. Sur- rait lived there, and she -said-she did; Weichman then camedown and opened ttoedoor; be appeared as if be had just gotten outof bed; he was in bis shirt, pants and stockings; he went to Canada mmy charge ior the impose of identifying John H. Surratt; hehada'bun- _ant opportunity to escape while in Canada, and, in fact, I le.thimin Canada and -returned to New York. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— Weichman did not, . makeany coniessions in regard to himself; wheri I left' him in Montreal he was in Company with officer Beg- leyf but he could have escaped, ior he went outonce wuh a citizen of Montreal, accompanied by an officer, to identuy some parues at St. Lawrence Hall. Judge Bingham objected lo the testimony as imuia- ter.al. Everybody knew that when Weichman was taken within a foreign jurisdiction he was free. Wimess.— I did notiind John H. Surratt at St. Law rence Hall; his name was registered on tbe 6th of April, and again ou tbe 18th; lie le.t the hotel the day ; wearrived in Canada, which was ou the 20th of April; Igot the first information that I would belikely.to'find -flShyifatt in Montreal, and that is thereasori why I took Weichman there; Mrsi Surratt stated to nfle when, I called there tbat she bad received a letter that- day tfrom John, dated in Canada; we were inquiring for the son: she said she had not seen him for two weeks, ¦JantJaad received a letter lrom him that day; I asked ber where it was, she said, ••somewhere about the house:" I coald not iind the letter; I didn't ask Mrs. • Surratt lo find it. .Testimony of J. Z. Jenkins. By Colonel Burnett.— The witness detailed the par ticulars ot assembling a party of Union men in the early partor the'w-ar,ana:watching a flag ior a night and a day to prevent Secession sympathizers lrom hauling it down. The witness was, at that time, the only man of any means not a Democrat in bis district. Hennade great* "ehorts and expended money needed for his»famtlyin getting Union voters. He had al ways been a loyaL man, and voted for Charles B. Cal vert in l%2, but in thelast election voted ior Harris, Democrat, the first time- in his life he had1 ever voted the Democratic ticket. He had not lost any property :in consequence ofthe war, except his negroes, and , , jiever made any complaints of that. Testimony of Andrew Collenoack. By ColoneL- Burnett,— I met J. Q. Jenkins on the night of the 17th or May, at Floyd's Hotel/in Surratts ville: he said he understood 1 had been telling he3 on him, and if he founti it to be the truth, he would give me ihe-= — whipping IPver had: after that lie said if I test.fied against him, or any one connected with him, he would give me a -^-L whipping; that was in the presence Oi Mr. CottinghamandMr. Floyd; he did not mention Mrs. Surratt's name; I have known him abotit ten years,' and never heaid him express any disloyal sentiments; I did not consider him on that oc casion very drUhk, but he had been drinking. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— I did not take any son of mine to Alexandria and put him in the Bebel army; fhe went thereby his own Consent, ana without mine; I did not place any restrictions in the way or'his' fioirfg; Mr3. Surratt has not given my family very much uthe wayofiood and clothes; she has not been a friend any more than one neighbor would be to another; my son returned from the Bebel army about three ""Weeks ago; I havebeena DemdPratin politics during • the war; I do not recollect that I have often said I wished the Sout.i to succeed or expressed disloyal senti ments. Testimony of Jmlson Jarbol. By Mr. Ewing.— I live in Prince George county; I do not know of any other Judson Jarbol living in.thac county; I never saw the prisoner. Dr. Mudd, before his arrest, audd.d not meet him list winter on H street. or any other time; I saw Mrs. SurraLtln April; I had not been her ior three years before; I have notseen the Bev. Mr. Evans, who used to'live in our neighborhood, lot several years until recently; I met him some three weeks ago on the street; I Was standing on the corner ol Gand Seventh street, and he walked past me; be used' to attend the' Methodist church in my neighbor hood. •*¦' Cross-examined by- Judge Bingham.— I know John H. Surratt; have not mpt liim very olten; I met bim on bevouih street some time early -in March, at a res taurant opposite Odd Fellows' Hall; several persons were with nim; I carinotstate who: Ionlyjustspoke to him; Idid know J. WilkesBooth; I know Harold; ¦ be was not with Surratt when I met him on Seventh 'Street; Ido not think I knew any of the other persons except Mrs. Surratt; I met her at the Carroll Prison I was uriidrtunately there myself: my daughter was in a room with her, aud I went to tne room to see my daughter; I did not talk to her about John orabput Harold'; Ido not know that Igot Into any particular trouble witn the Government; I was arrested on the road on tne 15th of April; I do not know why-? there- is1 no charge against me that I know of; I would like to know if I anvii ere as a witness or on trial. Judge Bingham. —You have the rignftflo decline on the ground mat1 the answer will criminate you. I wagt to know whether you were not accused of oifenqra against the Government in Maryland? A. I do not mink I was; I do not know *vhat i was arrested ior;/E have not heard of a soldifer being killed lately down in ¦my neighborhood; tiiey asked me something about a man "named Boyle, if I knew him. and it I had not harbored him; i told thein I bad not; mey said hewas Charged With the murder or a man byihename'of Watkins; I knew Boyle when he waS a hoy, bat i have not seen hini for iour years: Ido -riot know when the murder was committed; Captain Watkins lived a long ways from me; I do not think I have joined in anyjpi- 'liiication in honor of Bebel victories; I couid not ex pect tne success of tbe Kebeilion. Mr. lowing said this was a species of inquisition of a witness not olten indulged in. J uuge Bmgnam stated that the witness mustanswer, unless on tne ground that his answer would criminate himself. The examination was a prop, r one. Toe witness resumed.-^! hardly know what will crfr miuateine here. (Laughter.) q. Is it your opinion that these Confederates down here are criminals at all? A. 1 do not know much about it. Q. iiaj/e you not expressed an opinion that the Con federacy was all right? A. I do not think I have. Q. Do you not tmnK that way? A. I think a good many things. q. State whether you made an assault upon a man on election day, about lour years ago, and what you did to him. A. Are you going to try xne for that, be cause I have been' tried ior that twice. (Laughter.) Q. biaie whether- you attacked a man down there about four years ago, and killed him. A. Tnerewasa nretty smartattack'made on me; I understand the man was killed, but I do not know who aid it; i have answered, these questions beiore, and I do not know whether I ought to answer them again; I could not lell whether somebody killed him or not. , Q. Didyou bavea hand in it? No answer. Q. What was the man's name that was. killed? No answer. Mr. Ewing to witness.— If you have any statement yyu wish to make ot the circumstances oi the case you can make it. Witne~8i— I do not knpw whether the Judge wants to know ail the particulars about it or not. I bave been tried, by our Court and acquitted. By Mr. Ewing.— Q. In what court were ; you tried? A. In our county Court. Q. Were you, during last spring, winter or fall, in any house on II street, in Wasningtou? A. I do not think I was; I do not think I-nave any acquaintances living on H street; I do not know in what pure of trip city Mrs. Surratt lives: 1 never saw her bouse iu my h.e, and do not know anyuiing about her residence at all. By Judge Bingham.— Q. You say you were tried in your county court; wbat weie you tried for? A. I sup pose I was tried lor wnat you Su.idawiine ago; you said X killed a man; X was tried in that case. Q. Were you tried ior the murder oi a Union man? A. I do not know whether he was a Union manor not. Mr. Thompson and Dr. B.anford were called by Mr. Aiken, and testified to tlie loyalty of tne witness, J. Z. Jenkins. . Re-Examination of Miss Anna Surratt. By Mr. Aiken.— Q. State whether you recognize that picture. (Picture containing the motto, "Tjius will it ever be with tyrants: "Virginia the mignty; sic semper tyrunnis,") A. Yes; it was given to ine by, a, lady about two and a half years ago; I asked her iorn;sheiathist re-used to give it to me; I put it in njyport.oUo, andit has lain there ever since; jl have scarcely seen it." , By Mr. Ewing.— Q. How long have your lamily been living at thehouse' they -now occupy on H street, be tween toixtn and Seventh streets? A. Since the iirst of October last. Q. Have they occupied any other house in Washing ton? A. Nosir. * Q. .Have you^eenjudson Jarboe at your house? A. No; he never visited there ana I never saw bim there; >I haVe seen him pass; when 1 was hi the country, in a buggy, but have never spoken to bim; 1 was not ac quainted with him. Q. Are you the only daughter of Mrs. Surratt? A. Yes. I am her only daughter. CJ. Didyou ever see or hear of Dr. Samuel Mudd being at yourhouse? A. No sit. ' *¦«»*""« lauuw Tbe Court then adjourned. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 149 THURSDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. Washington, June 8.— The record of the previous day was read. Mr. Ewing. with the consent of the Judge Advocate, filed in evidence Order No. 26. dated February 22, 1K6U, defining the boundaries of tbe Military Department oi Washington, together with a map, identified by a witness, Dr. Blandford, as~correct, showing the roads and localities in the neighborhood of the house of the prisoner, Dr. Mudd. Judge Advocate Holt filed in evidence, without ob jection. Order No. 141, certified by the Secretary of war, promulgating the proclamation, of the President of the United States, and dated Sept. 24, 18'j2, suspend ing the writ of habeas corpus, and providing for the trial by military authority ot' all disloyal persons, and aiders and abettors of thellebelllon, &c. The Secre tary of War certifies that the order is a truecopy, and that the same i6 in full force and not revoked. Mr. Aiken asked permission to offer in evidence, on the part of Mrs. Surratt, the lollowing paper:— St. Lawrence Hall, Montreal, June3, 1865.— I am an actor by profession, at present filling an engage- merit at Mr. Buckland's Theatre in this city; I arrived hereon thei2:h of May; I performed -two engagements at Ford's Theatre in Washington during the past win ter, the lasc one closing on Saturday evening, 2.1th of March; I left Washington on Sunday evening, 2!ith of March, and have not been there since; I have no recol lection of meeting any person bv the name of 'Weich man. JOHN MCCULLOUGH. Sworn to and subscribed beiore me, at the United States Consulate General in Montreal, this third (3d) day of June. A. D. 1865. C. H. POWERS, Vice Consul-Gen eral. Judge Bingham objected to the reception of the paper on the ground tbat it was wholly immaterial Whether Mr. McCulIouah ever met i lie witness Weich man or not. Weichman, when on the stand, had been asked by the other side whether he saw McCullough, andit was not competent now to attempt to impeach him on that issue, as it was not material whetber be (Ldornot see McCullough. Mr. Eakin said the paper furnished a complete refu tation of a statement made by Weichman, so far as concerned the fact of his having seen McCullough* and .this was material i'i so farasit contradicted one item ofthestatementof that witness. Judge Advocate Holt read from several authorities in support ofthe position assumed by the prosecution. The objection of the Judge Advocate was sustained and the paper ruled out. Testimony of Colonel J. C. jKollairad. By Mr. Ewing. —I am Provost Marshal for the Fifth Congressional District ot Maryland; I am acquainted with Daniel J. Tnbmas; I did not at any tinie during last spring or winter receive a letter from hiratothe effect tjbat. Dr. S. A. Mudd bad said to him that Presi dent Lincoln, his whole Cabinet and every Union man Iri the State oi'Maryland would be killed within six o-r seven weeks: I never' received from Thomas any Jes ter in which tbe name of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd was mentioned; I did receive a letter irora him, dated FebruarySth.lSGS: Mr. Thomas was what was called an independent detective, that is he was not commis sioned under the Government, but by me specially to arrest deserters and dTalted men who failed to report, for which his comperisation was the reward allowed by Jaw for such arrests; such commissions were given to all who applied for them. By Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett.— The letter which I read from Thomas bad somo reference to Dr. Geo. Mudd, with whom I am acquainted. ' The hour of oneo'clock having arrived, the Commis sion took a recess until two o'clock, at which time the . body reassembled. Testimony of Alex. Browner. By Mr. Doster.— I live in Port Tobacco; I have known the prisoner Atzeroth lor the last six or eight years; Atzeroth wai at Port Tobacco several times during the spring; at one time, about the latter part oi "February 7l was goirig to the country, and he went with me: I think on that occasion he had come from Bryantown, and was riding a*sorrel horse; I never 'considered the prisoner a courageous man; he is gene rally known as being a coward; as an instance or bis -want of courage, I bave seen him make pretty good Aimeingettingoutofthewaywhen apistol was bred during a melee or anytbirigof tbat kind. Testimony of John S. Baden. Bv Mr Ewing.— I live in Prince George county, Maryland I am acquainted with Daniel J. Thomas. He is generally known as a very untruthful man. From my knowledge of his character Ido not think I would believe him unuer oath. C?oss-examined by Judge Advocate Holt.-I never knew * £SS1 to swear fafsely. I do not hold that be- causriaman speaks an untruth he wiH necessarily swear falsely. Mr. E\\-*ng stated that there remained to be called eight witnesses-in the Gase of Marifdj whom lie' desired to question, with a view to au impeachment ofthe witness-Thomas but they were not present. Que of th* witnesses wus expected to testify in regard to tbe w.iereaoouts of Mudu on the 23d of December last, Mr. Doster 'stated that, in the case of Payne, he de- siivd to ca 1 six additional witnesses, for tne, purpose of showing the antecedents ofthe prisoner, and the predisposition of his whole mmilyto insanity. The #m- ->. Tbese papers were permits or authority to do thiS work, were they? A. Yes sir. Q. He knew that you had" received this pay for the work done? A. I presume he did; he knew that I had received r he money. Q. The statements you made out were statements of the service done aud the amount claimed? A. Yessir. Q. What was the sutnori.yinally demanded? A* Fifty thousand dollars; he wanted to pay us -at first thririy thousand in-greenbacks. , Q. You expressed the opinion to Davis that no good was to be accomplished by burning those boats in. thai manner? A. Idid. Q. And hesaid he was going to abandon that nolicv? A. He did. Q, He did not condemn what had been done? A. He did notcondemn wtiathad been done. Q. He knew what had been done? A. He appeared to know. Q. Didyou come to any understanding about rates in regard to the destruction ofthe bridge? A, We cable to an understanding that we.were to receive four hun dred thousand dollars for doing it; I asked Mr. Davis whether it made any difference as to where the work was done; he said it did"not, that Xyinoia would do; that it would include anything Detraining to Quarter master's stores tor the army, and that jt ought tb be as near Sherman's base as possible; that Sherman was the man who was doing them, more barm than any one else at that time. Q,. These men whom you have named Barrett, and others, were they in the Confederate service? A. Yes. , Q. Doyou know where Minor Majers is now? A, I rave every reason to believe tbat hewas in Canada, aud that be- lelt there and went to Bermuda Hundred; that was thelast I beard from. him. Q, Do you know whether all these men are mem bers of . any secret organization? A. Tbey principally all belonged to a secret organization., Q, What was the name of tbat organization?' A. It goes by' the name ofthe O. A. K. organization. Q. TheOrderof American Knights? A. Yessir. Q. Will you say whetber you were a member of the order? ' No answer. Q. You need not answer If by so doing you will crimi nate yourself. Trie witness made no reply. Q. You say you are not able to state decidedly the process by which these boats were burned. Were- apy combustibles besides matches used ? A. I do not think there were. Q,. Do you remember the position "which Barrett held in the association? A. I understood he held the position of Adjutant-General of the State of Illinois. Q. The Adjutant-General of the O. A. K's.? A. I could not say whether of the O. A'. BVs. or of the Sons of Liberty. Q. Do you know whether Magers and Barrett were In JulylastatChicago? A. Mr. Magers left St. Louis 'either last June or July to go to Canada, and I presume he went then by way of Chicago. By the Court.— Q, Was the steamer IHaioatha one of the number of those burned? A. She1 was. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 151 Q. Do you recollect the number of lives that were lost then? A. I dp not. Q. Do you recollect the number of lives lost on the Imperial A. I do not think there were any lost on the Imperial. Q. She was one ofthe finest and largest on the West ern waters, was she not? A. She was. Q. Are you a steamboat man? A. Yes sir. Q. What steamboats have you been running on? A. I was on the Von Phul last, Captain Vaughn. Testimony of John F. Hardy. I am acquainted with the prisoner, Dr. Samuel A. Mudd; my residence is in the same neighborhood with that of the prisoner. On the day after tbe Presidents assassination I met him about two hundred yards from my house, when he said to me that there was terrible news; that the Presidentbadbeenkilled, and that Mr Seward and his son had been assassinated by a man named Boyle. Booth's name was mentioned some how, and he said that he did not know Which of the brothers it was; that there were several. This conver sation took place shortly alter sundown of the 15th. He said nothing about two men having been at bis bouse. I had seen Booth at the church there last fall and asked his name, when I was told that it was Booth; and at the time of the conversation with theprisoner, X asked him when Booth's name was mentioned whether it was tbe same Booth who had been down there before, apd he said he did not know. *-' Cross-examined by Mr. Ewing.— The conversation I have mentioned was commenced by the prisoner; he said he had got the news from Bryantown, where he had been; he seemed to feel all the sorrow be ex pressed in regard tothe assassination: the object of tbeprisoner visiting me at the time was iri regard to some rail timber; when I first saw Booth down there I think it was some time in November, and that it wasabout a month alter when I. saw bim a second time; I did not see or hear of any one having been with theprisoner when I met him. By Judge Bingham.— The prisoner did not tell me from whom hehad received tbe news ofthe Presi dent's assassination, and nothing more than he had heard it from Bryantown. Testimony of Eli K. Watson. By Mr. Ewing.— I reside near Horsehead. Prince George 'county; I have been acquainted-witb Daniel J. Thomas since he was a boy; bis reputation in the neighborhood in which be lived for veracity is bad: from my knowledge of his general reputation I would not believe him under oath; I saw Thomas in my field on the 1st day of June: be then toldme that he was a witness against Dr. Mudd, and that Joshua S. Naylor had sworn to put down his oath, but that if his oath stood be would get a portion of the reward offered lor Booth. - Cross-examined by Assistant Judge Advocate Bing ham.— The conversation in che field was begun by Thomas; he said he was going around- to "summon Seoplcasto bis character, and that he was going to ave me summoned as one. Cross-examination of Marcos P. Norton. iSawBoothplayin Washington, and in fhecityof New York, and alsoin Boston; I cannot tell how many times I saw him play; Icannot remember anyparti- cular fact connected witb Booth's representations on the stage, because I never made> any memoranda of such things, but frequently attended plays when away from home; was notpersonallyacnuainted with Booth; during mystayat theNational Hotellsaw himin conversation with others besides tbe p isoners. Tbe cross-examination of this witness was continued further, but failed to bring out any new points. Testimony of Henry Burden. I live in Troy, and know the witness Norton who has just testified; his reputation for veracity is bad; I would not believe him on oath. Cross-examined by Judge-Advocate Holt.— I have been Interested in a patent concerning horse shoe's; Mr. Norton was engaged as counsel on the opposite Bide; I cannot say that there wasmuch ill-feeling Oc casioned by tbat controversy: I did not tbrm any opinion ot Mr. Norton's charaoter because of that controversy; I was not acquainted with him at that time; my acquaintance with his character is based upon what I have known of him since; my relations with him have not been either of. a particularly ftSendly or unfriendly character; when I declare to theCourttbatheisnotto.be believed on oath I am giving expression to the opinion of -the mass of the people of Troy who know him: my opinion is arrived at from the testimony by which he was impeached. The Court then adjourned. ' ' Washington, June 9.— The reading of the previous day's record occupied until,about 12 o'clock. Testimony of Ju Judge Advocate Holt.— I have been intimately acquainted with Marcus P. Norton1 from twelve to fif teen years; I knew him first at school, in Vermont. subsequently at Troy. N. Y., where be now resides; I reside, when at home, at Lansingburg, three miles above Troy* of which place I was formerly a resident; from my personal knowledge of his reputation for truth and integrity, it is good; I would have no hesita tion in believing Mr. Norton under oath. -Gross-examined by Mr. Doster.^I havebeen living m Washington sines the 15th. of April .last: I have heard of cases of attempted impeachment, of Mr. Nor- tonvbut I know-nothing about them, except by general remark, that they were failures; one or two such oases, I have understood, have essentially failed; when at school, which was from 1S50 to 1853, Mr. Norton was an active, persevering scholar; my relations with him have never been ot a particularly friendly character; he is eugaged by first-class houses in Troy; I bave not lived in Troy for fifteen or twenty years. By Judge Advocate Burnett.— Mi\ Norton! has. Ere- guently vi3ited the county in which I live; I have also frequently met him laTroy; lam well acquainted with the people there: about. two years ago I was called on to give testimony in acase in which Mr. Norton was employed as counsel by a very reputable and wealthy firm. ,. Testimony of Silas H. Hodges. .Iresldeat pyeBeflifc in Washington; hold thepositlon of Examiner-in-Chief of the Patent Office; Ihave re sided In Rutland, Vermont, for over twenty j-ears; I bave been intimately acquainted with Marcus P. Nor ton for eleven years; he la well known in the vicinity of Butlamd; I never heard anything said agalnsthis re- fiutatlon until within the last two or three vr-ars; anyt hing tbat I have ever heard against his reputation has grown out of previous litigation, In which be was con nected: outside of thoso cases, In which much angry feeling was exhibited, I never beard Mr. Norton's re putation questioned, and never heard of any attempt to Impeach him before that litigation. ' Mr. Ewing stated to' theconrt, as a means df saving time, the following proposition bad been agreed to by the Judge Advocate.'' The three witnesses named bad been sent lor but had not arrived, and the counsel had not seen them. The proposition was as follows :J-"lt) ifc adfnitted by the prOsscution that 'John F. Watsbn, John Richardson j pd Thomas B. Smith, ldy-al citizens} will testify that they are acquainted with the reputa- tfon'bf 'Daniel J. Thomas, where he lives, and that it is bad, and tbat from their knowledge of it tbey 'would not believe him on oath: and further, that John A. Bichardson. above named, will testify that Daniel J. Thomas, a witness for the prosecution, made the'staEe- ment ontheist of June la^t. a3 sworn to by Williarri Watson, -befbre the court this day; and the prasecu-s tion agreethat this statement be put on record and re ceived and weighed by the court, as though the said witness had actually testified before iU After some time spent in consultation with the coun sel for the prisoner. Dr. Mudd, Judge Advocate Holt stated that being disposed to allow tbe accused atthe bar the benefit of all the evidence-that could bead- duced in their favor* he had consented that the decla rations of Mudd concerning two suspicious men at his house, previously ruled out by the Court, should be taken for what they were worth. Re-examination of Benj. Gardner and £>r. George A. Mudd. , Benjamin Gardner ahd*Dr. George A. Mudd being then recalled tor the defense, testified that Dr. Mudd stated on, the Sunday morning after the assassination, that "we ought immediately to raise ahome guard and hunt np all suspicious persons passing through our section of country, and arrest them,, unless they can show that, they are actually traveling under proper. authority, for there Were two suspicious persons at my bouse yesterday morning.'* To Dr, George A. Mudd the prisoner said, on Sunday morningthat "he regretted the assassination, as itwas a most damnable apt;" I:e also narrated the particulars of the Visit of two suspicious looking men to hts house on the morning of the previous day, stating that they seemed tobe laboring under some degree of excite ment more so than would be supposed' to accompany themerebr-pakingof thelegbf one of the fnen: that theystated that tbey bad come from Bryantown, arid inquired tbe way to Parson Wilmers; that whilst there one of. them ealled for a razor and shaved -off either his whiskers, or moustaches that he in company with the smaller of the two went down the road towards Bryaatawn; In search or a vehicle to- take them away. from ihis bouse, and that they finally left bis house on horseback, going in the direction ot Parson Wilmer's; when about parting With each, cthen? the prisoner requested tbe witnessi Dr. George D. Mudd, to communicate the fact of the presence of these suspicions men to tbe military au thorities at Bryantown, and that if called upon ha wouldgive every information iu his power relative to the matter,, but he. did no.t desire it to be publicly known that he had divulged the visit of these meni lor iear of being assassinated by the guerrillas. Re-examination of Hon f , A. Dana. The Hon. O. A. Dana was then recalled for the pro* secution. and identified eer-taiiu letters as having been received bybim when Assist ant Secretary of War from Major-Genecal'Dix. One of nhese letter-, bearing datp November*!?, 1-SG4, was signed bv General Di.s .and was explanatory ofthe other, which" has already been pub lished; being the one found in a Third avenue, rail way car of New York city, and commencing as follows*-* '•St. Louis, October 31, ihproprIety of entering 'upon' the ' record any thing which was not sworn to as evidences.) . ¦ Aiter.somatimespeut in this discussion the Court directed General Hartranft as Provost Marshal to send ior and compel the attendance of D. E. Monroe, the absent witness. The Court then adjourned. TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 153 Washington, July 10.— The record of the previous day was read, and the examination of witnesses con tinued as follows :— Testimony ot Daniel E. Morris. By Mr. Ewing.— I live la Charles county, Maryland: on the Sunday after the assassination of the President J beard from Hr. Moore, who came from Bryantown that morning, that it was Edwin Booth who assassi nated the President; know the reputation of the wit ness, Daniel J. Thomas, to be not very good; tbe peo ple consider him untruthful, and would not believe him under oath in tbe community in which he lived; Mr. Thomas would not believe he believed an oath; in tbe efforts oi' the Government to suppress tbe Rebellion [ bave sympathized with the Government, but did not approve ofthe abolition of slavery. The cross-examination of the witness developed no new facts. Testimony of It. A. Gobris-ht. (Called for trie defense.)— I' am a Journalistic agent and telegraph reporter for tbe Associated Press; I was it Ford's Theatre on the night ofthe assassination, having reached there five minutes to it o'clock; there was adifference of opinion among persons at the theatre as to whether Booth was the assassin or not; during the short time I remained there, I- was not at that time satisfied tJi&t Booth was the assassin. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— Q- But yon became satisfied during the night that it was Booth, and telegraphed that fact? A. I did not so telegraph Q. You became satisfied, the next day, that Booth was tbe assassin? A. It was so announced the next moifning in ]Lhe official Bulletin. /.3&e; counsel for the prisoners, Mudd, Spangler and Arnold. Mr. Ewiug, announced to tbe Court that the case had now been closed for the defense, so lar as these prisoners were concerned. Mr. Doster. on behalf of the prisoner Payne, stated tbat Dr. Nichols, who had been permitted to examine the question ofthe prisoner's alleged insanity, was not yet prepared to report, and thatseveral witnesses who were expected to testify on that question, bad not yet appeared, one of them being the prisoner's father, Bev. Mr. Powell, of Florida. The President ol the Court General Hunter, re marked tbat he had understood that Dr. Nicbols could not give any report on the question of insanity until the prisoner's antecedents wereshown, and that, there fore* the Court would he asked to wait for the prisoner's father, who lived in Florida. Mr. Doster said thatin the State of Maine it was cus tomary, when a plea of insanity was introduced in be half of the prisoner, to hand him over toapbysician for a proper determination of the question. He thought it not more than just that on a trial for his life, the prisoner should have the benefit of whatever evidence could be adduced in his favor; that while it might cost the Court a delay of six or eight days in awaiting the arrival of the witness summoned from Florida, the absence of the testimony ot that witness might cost the prisoner his hie. He asked that the prisoner be per mitted either to bring bisfriendshereortobe allowed a regular scientific in vestigatiqn of his case. . Judge Advocate Bingham stated that the prisoner s counsel had had forty days in which to procure the -attendance of all witnesses, and that every application on the part of the defense for witnesses had been granted as soon as made. , „. . Judge Advocate Holt then called several additional Witnesses for tbe prosecution. Examination of Henry O. Edson. . By Judge Advocate Holt.— I reside at St. Albans, Vermont; my profession Is that of an attorney and counsellor at law; I was engaged as counsel du *ngthe judicial investigation which occurred in Canada m connection witb wbat was known as the St. Albans raid; while at St. Johns, Canada, I heard George N. Sanders say, in speaking ofthe St. Albans raid, that he was ignorant of it before it occurred, but was penea- tisfied With it; that it was not the last of the kind that would occur, but that it would be followed up by the depleting of many other banks and the burning of many other towns on the frontier, and that many a "Yankee** (using a coarse and vulgar expression) would be killed: he said that there were organizations of men ready to burn arid' sack Buffalo and other places, and tbat the Yankees would spon see these !Hans fully executed; that any preparations made by he Government to prevent them would not prevent, hpugh they mighd defer them; Saucers at that time -Was acting as counsel ior tbe prisoners. Testimony of John Ii. Ripple. By Judge-Advocate Holt— I am a Fh-st Lieutenant Of the Thirty-ninth Illinois Begiment, and entered the service as a, private in mi; was a prima -ofmj, and Iwas confined for six months at Anderson* ill e, Ga.; wSLc ?the«Ibeard a Bebel officer, Quartermaster Huhn, state that. If Abe Lincoln was re-elected he would not live to, be inaugurated* ,that was before the Presidential election: be also Btated tbat they had a partv in the North who would, attend to the President and Mr. Seward; I heard the Lieutenant in choegetof the guard say that they bad friends who would, see that Lincoln was not reioaugurated; that was, I think, alter the Presidential election; the character of the food furnished to the prisoners at Andersonville was poor, both Iu quantity and quail tv; the prisoners died in large numbers, and I have no doubt that in many cases the deaths or the prisoners were brought about by starvation and the horrible treatment to which they were subjected; I beard the Bebel officers say in answer to the remonstrances of the prison ers that the treatment was good enough for them; they should eveiy one die; I heard a certain Captain Wilkes, wno had charge of the prisoners, say that on the first of July the location of the place in wbicb- the prisoners were confined, and everything connected with it, seemed to look to tbecrea'titfn of disease, and the infliction on the part of the Confederate authori ties of every possible suffering short of death; that Libby treatment was notsobad; packs of blood- bounds were kept lying around thecampatAndersonviUe., There oeing no further witnesses present, Judge' Ad vocate Holt gave notice that tbe Court could not wait much longer for the witnesses in the case of Payne, who had failed to appear. The President of the Court stated that the Court would wait until Monday morning, at 11 o'clock, to hear tbe report of Dir. Nicholson the alleged insanity of Pay ije. Tbe Court then adjourned to thehOur stated. Washington, June 12.— The reading of the record of Saturday having been concluded, the following wit nesses were examined:— Testimony of Mrs. Ii. Grant. By Mr. Doster.— I reside in Warren ton, Va.; I re cognize the prisoner Payne as a man whom I saw on the road in front of my house, having three Union soldiers in his charge; an attempt was made to kill the; prisoners, and. tbe man called Powell (meaning Payne) tried to prevent it, and I heard him say that he was a gentleman and wished to be treated- as such; that if they attempted to kill, the man he had captured be would defend his prisoner at the peril of bis life; one ofthe prisoners was killed, when thepartyleft the road, and I did not see them afterwards; the affair oc curred last Christmas. Cross-examined by Judge Advocate Holt.— I wag speaking ofthe affair to a citizen, arid telling him this man tried to save tbe Union soldiers, when I was in formed that his name was Powell; I bad not seen bim; before, nor have I seen him. since until to-day, but I am certain he is the man. By the Court.— He was dressed as a Confederate, and I thought they called him lieutenant; there were the marks of an officer upon bim; he looked more genteel than tbe common soldiers. Testimony of John Grant. By Mr. Doster.— I am the husband of the witness who has just left tbe stand; at the time the . affray oc curred in front of my house, about Christmas last, I was returning home and was within three hundred yards of my house, when the firing on the roads com menced; all I heurd was that the prisoner at thebar, who went by tbe name of Powell, had tried to save the lives of two Union soldiers; the prisoner was not an officer, so far as I am aware. Testimony of J. P. Patterson. By Mr. Cox.— I am an ensign ' In the navy: I have known the prisoner, Michael O'Loughlin, about six years; on the afternoon of Thursday, the 13th of ApriL we came together from Baltimore to Washington, reaching here between five and six o'clock; we came up the avenue and stopped at Bullman's Hotel; I then went into a barber shop to get shaved, and the prisoner proceeded up the street, but rejoined me be fore I had been shaved; he was not out of my com*- pany at any other time that evening; I went up the avenue with him to look at tbe illumination, but did not go farther than Seventh street; we went to the Canterbury about nine o'clock, and stayed there about three-quarters qf an hour, after which we returned to Bullman's Hotel, getting there between ten and eleven o'clock; we remained there about half 154 TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT: WASHINGTON. an hour, and then went out again; the avenue was so crowded during the evening that it was almost im possible to get along; I can state positively that the prisoner was not near the house of the Secretary of War on Franklin Square at any time on Thursday evening; we retired between one and -two o'clock oh Friday morning; the prisoner was at his room when! called next morning; be was not with me on Friday afternoon; on Friday evening I met him at Bullman's jjotel; he was there with me riutil ten o'clock, and then went out in company with a man by the name of Fuller; that was after the > assassination: we had arranged to return to Baltimore on Friday morning; and I proposed to stay until evening, whipb we did. Cross-examined by Judge Advocate Holt.— It was impossible for theprisoner to have been at the house ofthe Secretary of War before ten or eleven o'clock on the evening of the I3tb of April, as I did not part with him at any time; when he rejoined me at the barber shop;, after leaving me on Thursday afternoon, be told me he.b'adbeen to see Booth; thatjwas be tween 5 and 6 o^clock; the next mprninghewas to go to see Booth, and I called for hinti,at the National Hotel, but he was not there; I then went ,'lp his room and saw bim there; he said he had been to," see Booth. but did not see him; that .Booth was out; he did not state his Object iu endeavoring to see Booth. By Mr. Cpx.T-Hpdid not.say anything abo$t Boqth owing him money: "he merely said' that he' had been to see Booth on Friday morning; he told me he had not seen Booth. . ¦ ' By Judge Advocate Holt.— I had no particular rea son for staying in town- until ' Friday evening: I sug- f;ested to the party in whose company I was; OILouglii- in among the number, that we should remain until Friday evening; I.badnp Special, reasons for so doing: O'Lpughlin did not make any suggestions of that kind; the arrangements for our visit tb Washington we de termined on Monday-in Baltimore; Thursday being "theday fixed; I suggested the day;, the party; .done a great deal pf drinking while in. Washington; it would e impossible for me to say how many times we drank: I do not think it could bave been more!thah;ten; one of the party, Mr. Early, was not sober. * Testimony of H. R. Sweeney. By Mr! Aiken.— I am acquainted with John M. Floyd; I met'him on the 14th of April last at Warlbo'rbTand rode with bima portion of thP Way from ^Marlboro to wards his home:, he seemed to.be considerably under the influence of liquor; he drank, or attempted1 to drink on the road, at least to put the bottle to his'lips;'tbe bottle contained I iguor. - Cross-examined by Judge Advocate -Holt.— I drank -w,ithhim; I could riot tell who drank the most; both drank from tbe same bottle; he seemed tobe consider ably excited which I attributed to the ihlluence of drink; hewas aloaeinfjhisjbuggy; I was on horseback; hewas excited in conversation and general deport ment; I do-not think I was excited rnyself; I Suppose he knew what he was;doibgV and where he Was going at least; I thought he was bole to take care'of himseln By Mr. Clampitt,— I have* known J. Z. JenkiriB, a brother of Mrs, Surratt, for sixteen years: I have heard it said ot bim that hewas a zeaibUs Uriiori man: on one occasion a Union flag was raised within a hun dred yards of the bouse .in which I boarded, and there being a rumor tbat an attempt' would bemade fO cut it down, Mr. Jenkins1 formed. one of a party who stood guard around it all night; I heard that he came to Washington to get votes for the Union ticket in Mary land, but I do not know anything of that; I believe bim to be to-day a consistently loyal man. ¦ By Judge Advocate Holt.— I have never acted ¦against theGovernment that I know of: I was strictly neutral in my conduct and, feelings in regard tothe Rebellion; I ivas perfectly indifferent as tri whether the Bebellion failed or succeeded: - By the Couri.— I parted witlj Mr. Floyd, on the occa sion of which I bave spOken, about Six knifes from 'Surrattsville; I did-not take more than on&drinkout of the bottle from which Mr Floyd drank. Mr. Aiken, counsel for Mrs. Surratt, stated that wheri, on Friday last, he annouriced tbat he would not delay the court after theother counsel ibr the accused had closed theirdelence, hehad not learned some im portant facts since communicated, to him. On Friday afternoon last he visited Surrattsville and Marlbo rough, and while on tbat ''visit acriufred some Iricts which he believed to be of material importance. in tbe case of the accused, Mrs. Surratt. He therefore asked thp privilege of introducing, tbat testimony. The wit nesses would probably be present to-morrow, and their examination might occupy riot more than a couple of hours, and would not be likely to affect materially any rebutting testimony which the Government mignt have to offer. Judge Advocate Holt stated that, Inasmuch as some Important testimony for the Government still re mained to be taken, and the witnesses, might 'not. ar rive to-day, -but would be present [to-morrow, there would be no loss of time. He was therefore disposed to grant the request of counsel. Testimony of Assistant Adjutant-General E. I). Town send. By Judge Advocate Holt.-rQ. State whetber or not you are acquained with G. J. Rains, a Brigadier-Gene ral in the Bebel miiltarv service. A. I was very'well acquainted with G. J. Batns, who in 1861 resigned his commission as a Lieutenant-Colonel ofthe Fifth regu* lar-lJnited States infantry, Q. Were you acquainted with his handwriting? A, Q. Look at that indorsement1 and state whetber you believeittobeinhis handwriting (exhibiting a paper to witness). A.,.Tonever bad any conversation with her onpolitical subjects. Wituess was acquainted with J. Z. Jenkins. His im pression was lhat he was a good Union man. . I am acquainted with the Bev.. Wm. A. Evans; I know that hekepta store in, ithe neighborhood in which J lived some ten years ago; I know nothing of his pres- entfl-eimtation ior trutn and veracity. By Mr. Clampitt.— Cannot say that Mi\ Jenkins .is now a consistent Union man; hewas twri years ago; the report in the neighborhood now is that he Is not loyal; >never knew him to commit any disloyal act. Testimony of Wm. XV. Iloxten, By Mr. Aiken.— I reside near Surrattsville, and have known the prisoner, Mrs. Surratt, for about twelve years; she has always been looked upon in our neigh borhood as(a very good, kind, Christian lady, and a church-going woman; have met hor frequently of late years, and never beard ber express a disloyal senti ment; I knew J. ii. Jenkins atthe commencement of the war; hewas knowri as a very strong Union man, and bore that reputation until he lostnis negroes; I ncver.knew of.his .expressing any sentiments opposed to the Government, Testimony of Henry Hawkins (Colored). By Mr. Aiken.— I have lived at Surrattsville about elcvpn years; was formerly a slave ot Mrs. Surratt; she always treated me kindly; remember that on one.pcca- sionsome Government horses broke away from Gies boro' and came to Mrs. burrutt'sstable, they were fed and taken care ol'ut her expense; never heard any po litical expressions irom Mrs. Surratt; she irequently fed Union so^dier^ passing her bpuse, and gave tbern the best she had; do not think she took any pay for it; £ sometimes heard that Mrs. Surratt could not see very well; h aye seen her wear spectacles. Testimony of Rachael Senilis, (Colored.) I lived with Mrs. Surratt for six years; was hired by her; X never had any reason to complain of hard treat ment while with her; she frequently had Union sol diers, and always tried to do the best she could for them, giving tbem thp best In the house, and Very oiten giving them all In tbe bouse; I recollect that one time she cut up the last bam for a party of Union sol diers; never knew her to take pay from the soldiers; have seen them come there and get refreshments and not pays never knew her to say anything In favor of Re- Ex ami nation of major Eckert. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— Witness stated thafitheday on which General B. F. Butler was ordered to leave New York* after thp last Presidential election, was the lltb of November, and that General Butler made application to besallowed to remain until the following Monday, the 19th of November, which application wasgranted.1 .¦>>'¦ ».. Re-examination of Richard Montgomery. By- Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham.— Witness stated that the hour for the departure of the train which left Montreal, Canada, to connect with tbe through trainsfor Washington was three u'clock P. M.; that the distance between Montreal and Washington was usually traveled in thirty-six to thirty-eighthours; that a person leaving Montreal at.three o'clock on the afternoou of thel2tbof ApriLwOuld rteach Washington before daylight on the morningof.the 14th. . ' Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— A person leaving Montreal on the afternoon of tbe 12th would arrive in tbe city of New York,.at the furthest, at eleven o1clock in the forenoon of the 14th; leaving New. York at six or seven in the evening, one would arrive at Washington in ten or eleven hours. Re-Cross-Examination of J. S. Debonay. By Mr. Ewing.— At tbe time the pistol was fired on the evening ot the assassination." witness was on the stage of Ford's Theatre, leaning againstthe corne|rof a scene; bn the left-harid side; when I tirst'bhw' the priso ner, Spangler, after trie escapp of Booth, he was_sbut- tingthffseene back, so as to allow the people, t6 get upon the stage: that was about a minute and a half aiter Booth ran across the stage, followed by Mr; Stewart; spangler then ran to the ereen-Todm to get some water for tbe persons in the President's box; I saw Spangler go to the door when Booth called hitn, previous to tbe assassination; did not bear any conver sation between Spangler and Booth; witness was on the pavement in from of the theatre about five mln* utes beiore the assassination; did not see Spangler thereat any time; never knew Spangler to wear a heavy fnousbache. John Pile aud Andrew Collenback were then called for the defense, tbe lormer sustaining the character of one ofthe witnesses ibr the defense, J. Z. Jenkins, and the latter testifying in regard to the remark made btf Mr. John M. Floyd, that be bad been i nuocemiy per- TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 157 suaded into tbe matter, referring to the custody of the sLooting-irons by Mrs. Surratt or Mrs. Surratt's family. The counsel for tbe prisoners, except in the case of the prisoner Payne, whose alleged insanity is yet to be reported upon, severally stated that their defense had closed. There being no further witnesses present, the Com mission adjourned till to-morrow at 12 o'clock M. Washington, June 14.— Tbe previous day's record was read, when tbe Commission took a recess until two o'clock, In order to allow an examination of thepri soner Payne by the commission appointed for that purpose. The Commission reassembled at two o'clock, when Mr. Doster stated that he had closed the defense in the case of the prisoner Payne, and did not propose to call as witnesses the medical gentlemen who had been ap pointed to investigate the condition of Payne as to his insanity. Judge Holt then stated that these gentlemen would be called for the Government. Re-examination of l>r. James C. Hall. By Judge Holt.— The witness had examined the pri soner, Payne, this morning, and was assisted by Drs. Norris and Porter. and.subsequPnUy .Surgeon-General Barnes joined in the examination. The prisoner was asked almost the same questions that were put to him yesterday, for the purpose of ascertaining whether his answers would be similar; be answered wrth rather more promptness than before, and bis answers were much the same. Q. Are you now prepared to express an opinion whe ther or not, in your judgment, the prisoner is a sane and responsible man? A. I am now prepared to say there is no evidence of mental insanity; the prisoner's mind is feeble and uncultivated, but I cannot discover sufficient evidence of mental incapacity. Cross-examined by Mr. Doster.— Q, What are you prepared to state as to bis moral insanity? A. we asked him the question to-day whether he believed i n aGod; he said i)iat he did, and that he was a Just God; be also acknowledged to me that atone tiriae be had heen a member ofthe Baptist Church; I asked him the question whether he thought that the assassination of au enemy in time of war was justifiable and after some little nesitation he-said he believed it was. Testimony of R*r. Norris. Tbe witness, In company witb Surgeon-General Barnes, and other medical gentlemen, made an ex amination this morning of the prisoner Payne, and arrived at the conclusion that he was a sane man. There was nothing in the prisoner's looks, speech, or conduct to indicate that be was of unsound mind; on Ihe contrary, his reasoning faculties appeared to be good, as also his judgment. Cross-examined by Mr- , Doster.— I am not familiar with cases of insanity; I do uot think the conduct of the prisoner during the examination could have been thatof a madriian: the prisoner might be a monoma niac but If such was the case, the witness would pro bably have had bis suspicions aroused, as such persons almost invariably, in conversation with strange per sons, reter to the subject of tbeir insanity. Testimony of Surgeon-General Barnes. By Judge Advocate Holt.— The prisoner, Payne, was examined by the witness and»tber medical gen tlemen, but no evidence of insanity was discovered^ the coherent manner in which he narrated his story of(himself, giving tbe places at which,, be had been. and his occupation, and. moreunportant than all. his reiteration of the statements made by bim, on yester day, were proofs of bis saneness. ( Testimony of Rr. Porter. By Judge-Advocate Holt.— Having been present this morning at the examination of the prisoner. Payne, the witness believed tbat he wasasane man. The prisoner had been under the Witness' care since his confinenlent in the Arsenal, and from the inspections Which he had made, witness arrived at the conclusion that he was a sane and responsible man. The cross-examination of this witness was mainly with reference to what constituted mental or moral insanity, and was terminated by the president ot the Court objecting to the course of examination as im- Assistant Judge- Advocate Bingham entered upon the record several papers, among which were a certified copy of the resolution, of the Senate of tbe United States consentingto and ordering, the appointment of William. H Seward as Secretary of State of the United States, and the qualification of Audrew Johnson, on the 15th of April. 1865. as President of the United States. Judge Holt said that some additional testimony, re lating exclusively to the general conspiracy and not affecting either ofthe prisoners particularly,, would be offered on behalf of the Government. Having under stood that one of the arguments for the defense had beenfullyprepared.be desired the Court to- bear it, witb tbe understanding that it shonld not preclude tbe offering of this testimony. Mr. Aiken said it was the wish of the counsel that all the testimony which tbe Government had should be handPd In before that argument was presented to the Court, It bad been thought possible thai Mr. Johnson. himself would be present to-morrow to deliver th4 argument in person. If he was not present, Mr. Clam pitt. by agreement among the counsel, would present the argument to the Court. Judge Holt Inquired as to which of the prisoners the argument was intended to apply. Mr. Aiken said it was an argument relative to the Jurisdiction of the Court whicb was prepared by Mr. Johnson and in which all the counsel concurred. It was intended for all tbe prisoners. Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham said that Mr. Johnson was not counsel for all the prisoners. . General Wallace said that if the argument on the jurisdiction of the Court was ready it would not be im proper for the Court to hear it, and in order to con sider the question he moved that the Court be cleared. The motion was agreed to, when the Court was cleared. After some time the doors were, reopened, and it was announced tbat the Court had adjourned until Friday morning at 11 o'clock. Washington, June 16,— Colonel Tompkins, member of the Court, was not present at the session of the Court to-day, on account of indisposition. Testimony of Robert Purdy. By Judge Advocate Holt.— The witness said he re sided in Virginia, and had been in the Government service since 1861; a letter heretofore published, pur porting to have been dated at South Branch Bridge Virginia, April 6th, 1865, addressed to "Friend Wilkes/' and referring to certain oil speculations, and suggest. ing an escape by way of Thornton's Gap in case the party failed to get through on his trip after striking ile, was shown to the witness, who stated that be had never seen It before; the witness testified that the allu sions to Purdy contained in the letter had reference to himself; that the writer was known to him as a person by the name of Jonas McAleer, and tbat some of the allegations of the letter, especially tbat with reference to a difficulty with the girl spoken of, were untrue. Cross-examined by Mr. Aiken.— South Branch Bridge is on a branch of the Potomac River, about twenty- two miles from Cumberland; letters are not usually mailed from South Branch Bridge, but from a little village known as Green Spring Bun. just above it; there is no post office box at South Branch Bridge; there are no oil wells in that vicinity. Testimony of ». S. Eastwood. By Judge Advocate Holt.— I live in Montreal, Canada, and am assistant manager of tbe Montreal branch of the Ontario Bank; I am acquainted with, Jacob 'Thompson, formerly Secretary of the Interior ofthe United States, and with the account which he kept in the Ontario Bank; the moneys deposited in that Bank to his credit accrued from the negotiation of bills qf exchange drawn by the Secretary of the Treasury of the so-called Confederate States upon their agents at Liverpool. Q. State whether or not in the course ofthe disburse ments made by Jacob Thompson of the fund placed to his credit, this requisition was drawn ori the bank!, (Exhibiting tb witness a paper, given below). A. It was, it is in my handwriting. Q. Please read it' to tbe Court. A. fBeading the paper.) Montreal, August 10, 1864. Wanted, from the Ontario Baak on New York, in favor of Benjainin Wood. Esq., for §25,000 current funds, J§10,000, debit 815,000. The paper shows that the requisition was originally drawn In favor' of Benjamin Wood, Esq., and that the name oi D..S, Eastwood was substituted. Q. State the exaot condition of the paper. A.. As it reads now it is a draft on New York, bay able, to the "order of D. S. Eastwood, that is, myself. Q. State how that change in the requisition occurred. A. The name of Benjamin Wood, as it appeared originally, was erased at Mr. Thompson's request, and mv name as an officer of the bank was substituted. Q. That is the original paper, is it not? A., It is, Q Now look- at this bill of exchange, (exhibiting another*paper to' witness) and state whether it was drawn upon that requisition. A. It was. Bv request of the Judge Advocate the witness then read the paper to the Court. It is dated Montreal, au- 15* TKttAfc OF TH$ ASSASSIN'S AT'-WAS^NfefTON1. ¦gust 10, 1^64, and, is directed to' the' Cashier of the Citv Bank, New York, the wording being as\ follows:— "At tbreedays sight, please pay to the'ordet of D. S. East wood, in current ruh'ds, twenty-fiVe thousand dollars, value received, and charge the same to account-pf this branch." The indorserirentonthebill directs the pay ment to be made to Hon. BPnj. Wood, or order. Signed B. F. Wood. Q. You state that the twenty-five thousand dollars for which th's bill was drawn, is the same fPr Which tbat requisition was made by Mr. Thompson in the name or Berij. Wood? A. It was. Q, State whetber or not the bill of exchange ypu have 1ust,read is the originalon'P? A. It is, Q, Where did you obtain it? A. I-oHtairied it in New York, from the Cashier of the bank on which it Was drawn. ' Q. Does it bear the marks Of having been paid? A. I amviot acquainted with the usual marks of cancPlirig te New York, but I understood that, it was paid. The witness statedfurther that lie was not acquainted with the Benjamin Wood referred to. but he supposed it tobe'thesarae who at the date Of that transaction wasamembpr of the Congress of the United Srates. .. Qrpss-examined by Mr. Aiken.— I do hot recollect or having ever Cashed any drafts or checks in fkvor of either "James iWatson Wallace, B'chard Montgomery, James B. Men-it or John WilkesBooth. About tire first of October lastTBopth purchased aJtjill.on the bank of Montreal with whi'en witness wasconiiected. Never heard the name of John H. Surratt mentioned 'hf-fore8 The Judge Advocate exhibited to the-, witness* Jistof localities upon which drafts had bean, made by the Ontario Bank.- and requested bim to give the dates and amounts of drafts whicb^as shown by the paper- had "been' drawn on New York. The witfle^S stated that %he -following were among the number ordfafts drawn on tbe 3d Of October last:— A draft for $10;000in gold: on the lltb of October one of fnOOf) in gold- on Novem ber 3d. 4th and 8th. bills "for about SfiOOO in United States currency: on the' 14th and 21st of March last, small .drafts were also drawni Testimony of Oeor^e Wlltes. By Judge Advocate :¦ Holt. — T am acquairited with Benjamin Wood, of New York; and khowhis hand writing. The indorsement of "B. Wopd" on the back of the bill -of exchange given above was exhibited to the ¦witness, and ihe handwriting identified by him as that of Hon. Benjamin Wood, of New- York. The witness stated further that at the time at which the paper appeared to have beeen dated Wood was a member of the Congress of the United States, and, be 'believed, editorand proprietor of the Daily News. Testimony of Air. Abram R. Russell. By Judge Advocate-General Holt.— I am acquainted with Beriiatiiin Wood, of the city of New York, and know his handwriting; 'the indorsement on tbehil.%of .excharige'exbibi ted to the previous witness was identi fied by this witness to be the, handwriting of Mr. "Wood: atthe time ofthe date o.'that bill of exchange Mr/Wood was a member.ofth'e Congress ofthe United . States and editor. and proprietor of the New York i)ailjf News; the'Witness had been in the habit- of ' re - ceivingJetterSfromMr. Wood. Tbe Court then took a recess until two o'clock. Upon reassembling, Judge Advocate Holt suggested that if the argument ofthe counsellor the defense was now commenced, in the absence of Colonel -Tompkins, a member of tbe Court, who was indisposed, it would have to be read over to him during a subsequent ses sion of the Court. He thought there would be noloss Of time to the Court if an adjournment was taken till Monday. The Court adjourned till Monday, at ten o'clock. Washington, June li).r--Mr. , Aiken, stated to the Court that he should not.be prepared until Wednes day to read the argument In ijrie case of Mrs. Surratt. ' The delay was attributable to the voluminous evidence previously, io be examined by him, Beverdy Johnson's Argument. Mr, Clampitt read the argument .addrfessSd to the President and -gentlemen or'the Commission, signed ¦» by Beverdy Johnson and concurred in by Frederick A. Aiken and JohnW. Clariapittfls associate counsel for Mrs. Mary E. Surratt. Mr. President arid Gentlemen of the Comtnisslbn:— Has the Corhml^sion j ufcisdictioh ofthe cases befpre it Is the question wbich I propose to discuss, ' That ques tion, imnll courts, civil,, criminal and military, must be considered and answered affirmatively before Judg ment can be pronounced . And St miist be answered correctly, or the judgment pronounced Is void. Eve? an interesting and vital inquiry, it is' of engossing In terest and of awfuMmpdrtance, when error may lead to thp unauthorized taking of human life. In such a case, thecourt- called upon, to render, and the officer who is to approve its judgmefat.and have it executed, h?.ve a concern peculiar to theriiselves. As to each, u responsibility IS Involved, which, however coneclen- t'ously and firmly met, is calculated and cannot fail tp 'awaken a great solicitude and induce tbe most mature c'opsiaeration. The nature of the- duty is such tliijt even honest error affords np jtrhpunity. T|ie legal personal dorise'querices, even in a case' of hon^t, nni§- takenjudgrnentj, /canjxot- be. avoided., That this'is/uov exaggeration, thdCouimiwsiou WjU-I think, l}p satisfied before r shaU liaveconeiuded, I refer to it now and shall ag:,iu, with no view to shake your firmness. Such au attempt would-Be'alike discourteous mid un profitable. Every member composiag the eomraiB- sjon will, I am sure. , meet., -ail .the responsibility tbat belongs to it as1' becomes gentlemen and soldiers.1'' I therefore repeat',-' that my-%ble object in adverting io it is to obtain a well-considereu [and,, matured , md^nwnt.-, So far, the .qtuestioa of jurisdiction has .riot been discussed. O^he pleas •Miich Specially present it, as soon as filed, were "over ruled. -But that will'nbt, because, properly; it^hdiiTd noti)revent your considering it with the deliberation that us grave naLure demands. And it j> for you to de cide it, and at this tinne, for you alone. 'The commis sion you are acting under of itself does not and 'could 'not'decideit. .Ifw-nauthoritePd; it. Is a 'mere nullity, the usurpation of a power notyested j,u the^xecutivpyaiHi conferring no auihorily whatever upon you. To hpla otherwise would be to-ffl'ake the Executive tbe-es«iiu- Sly.eapdconc.usivejudgeotits own powers, and tbat would be to "make that departtderit omnipotent. The powers- of the President under tbe Constitution are great, and amply suhnciehtto give all needed efficiency to the Office.' The Convention that formed therConsti- sutioh, arid the people whoadoptedit.consideredthpsfe powei*3 sufficient, and granted noothers. Iutbemirins of both (.arid substfqu^ht history ' has setye^inXp stfehgtheri'theirinp'ression), danger to liberty ft more to be dreaded from the Executive than from ariy Other department of the Government. Sq Jar, therefore, from meaning to extend itspowprs beyond what wasdeeinea necessary to the whofesomepperation of tnl"* GoVern- mellt, they were studious' ,tb place them peypriu1 the rpach of-. abuse. With this view, before erirer'ibrg "bfl the execution of bis office," tbe President is reaui-cedHid take" an path "Jaithfuliy*' to discharge its duties',' a'nd to the best of his "ability preserve,, protect arid defend the Constitution of theUnited States." HeHalsp liable to "be removed f.om office 'ori'impeacninent for arid conviction of treasori, , bribery, "or btber high. cririies and misdemeanors?' If "be Violates, the Constitution, if be fails to preserve it, arid; abui*all if he Usurps powers not granted, he is false to hreoffi- cialoath, arid liable to be indicted arid 'ebbvicted; arid to be impeached. Tor each an offense, bis removal -fr,onn,.othce is the necessary Consequence. In such a contingency "he shall be removed" is the corinmapd of the Constitution. What stronger evidence Could thej^ be that his power's, all of them, iupVatie arid, in wai*, are only such as tne.Cbiistitutiorictinfers? Builf'this was not evident frond the instrument itself, the cha racter of tbe men who comprised trie Co'riVentipn. and thevspirit ot the American people at thatperiod'would prove it. Hatred of a monarcbv.made^the most-in tense bythe cduductof the monarch from whose Go- vernment tbey. had recently separated, and a deep- seated love of constitutional liberty, made the more keen andactive'bythe sacrifices which had illustrated their revolutionary-career, ^constituted them a people who could never be induced to delegate ariy executive authority iiufso carefully restricted arid guarded as tp_ render its abuse or Usurpation almost impossible. 'It these observations are, well- founded, and i suppose tbey will not be denied, it follows that an executive act beyond executive authority car furnish no defense against the legal coftseqhences of what ate done linHer it. I have said that the question of'jurisdictiori is ever open. It may be raised by counsel at any stage of the trial, rind if it is not the courtnot oo'y may but is bound to notice it. tlnless jurisdiction, then.exists, the authority to try does not exist, and whatever is done is "orumnonjudice," arid utterly void. Thisdod- trine is as applicable to mllitarv as to other courts. O'Brien tells us that tbe question maybe raised,by deriiurrerif tbe facts charged ijp nrit>Ponstitute 'flrcof- fense.or if they do, nqt an oireuse pognizabie by1 a Tnn% tary court, or that it maybe- raised by a special plea, oi under the general one of not jguilty. (O'Brien, 248.) BeHart says : "The Cotirt is the judge Of its owri'eo'na- pPtency at any stage of 'its proceedings, and is bpnudtb notice.questioris ofjurisdiction Whenever raised.^ '(De- Hart, IIL) Sent whetherit has jurisdiction over these partfes anil e crimes Imputed to thein. That a triburialllkethis has no Jurisdiction over qtherthau inilltary oflfensl^s, & believed .to be selt-eviderit. That offenses defined and punished by the civil law, and, whose trial' is provided for by the same law, are not the subjects of military jurisdiction, is; of course, true. A military, as contrfV distinguished from a civil offense, rii«st, therefore, be made to abnear, and when it is.it must also appear tbat thp military law provides for its trial and punish ment by a military tribunal. If that law dpes not fftrpjah a mode of trial, or -ami a yutttehment, the case'IiPrinplVvidea for, and, irsiat Trial of the asIassins at Washington. 159 as the military power is concerned, is to go unpu nished. But, as either the civil, common or statute l£W embraces every species of. offense that the United States or theStates have deemed it necessary to pu-> pish, in all such cases the civil courts are clothed with1 every necessary jurisdiction. In a- mil'tary court, if thecharge does notstute a "crime provided for gene rally or specifically by any of the articles of war," the prisoner mustbe discharged. (O'Brien. p. 235.) Nor is lt«sufficient that thecharge is of a crime known to the military law. . The offender, when he commits it, must be subject to such laworbeis not subject tomi- litary jurisdiction. The general law has "supreme and Undisputed jurisdiction over all. The military law puts forth no such pretension: it aims solely to enforce on the soldier theadditional duties be has assumed. It constitutes tribunals for the trial of breaches of mili tary duty only.'* (O'Brien, pp. 26, 27.) - "The*-one code (tbe civil) embraces all citizens, whether soldiers or not; tbe other (the military) has no jurisdiction over any citizen as such. (lb.) The provisions of the Constitution clearly maintain thesame doctrine. The Executive has no authority "**to declare war, to raise and support armies, to pro vide and maintain a navy." or to make "rules for the government and regulation" of either force. These powers are exclusively in Congress. ' The armv cannot be raised or have laws for its government and regula tion except as Congress shall provide. This poWerof Congress was granted by the Convention witbouteb- jection. In England the King, as the generalissimo of the whole kingdom, has this sole power, though Parliament has. frequently interposed and regulated for itself. But with us it was thought safest to give*the entirepowerto Congress, "since otherwise summary and severe punishment might be inflicted at the mere will oftbeJSxecutive." (3, Story's Com., sec. 1192.) No member ofthe Convention or anycommentatoron the Constitution since has intimated that even this Con gressional power could - be applied to citizens not be longing to thearmy or navy. In respect, too. to the latter class, the power was conferred exclusively on Congress to prevent thatclass being made the objects of abuse by tbe Executive, to guard them especially from ''summary and severe punishments," inflicted by mere executive will. TheexisteneeofiShch a power being vital to discipline, itwas necessary to provide for it; but no member suggested that- it should be or could be made to apply to citizens not in the military or naval service, or be given to any other department in whole or in part than Congress. Citizens not belong ing to tbe army or navy were not made liable to military law, or under any circumstances to be deprived otany-of the guaranties of personal liberty provided by the Constitution. Independent ot the considera tion that the very natureof the Government is incon sistent witb such a pretension, the power is conferred upon Congress in terms that exclude all Who do not belong to the " land and naval forces." It is a rule of Interpretation coeval witb its existence that the Go vernment in no department of it possesses powers not granted by express delegation, or necessarily to be implied from those tbat are granted.- This would be the rule incident to the very nature of the Consti tution ; but to place it beyond doubt, and to make it an^mperative rule, the tenth amendmentdecl ares that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor'probibited by it to tbe States, axe re served to tbe States respectively, or to the people." The power given to Congress is " to make rules ibr the f;overnment and regulation of the land and naval orces." No artifice of ingenuity can make these words ir elude those who do not belong to the army and navy. And they are therefore to be construed to exclude all others as if negative words to that effect had been added. And this Is not only the obvious meaning of the terms, considered by themselves, but is demonstrable from other provisions of the Constitution. So jealous were our ancestors of ungranted power, and so vigi lant to protect the citizen against it, that tbey were unwilling to leave him to the safeguards which a pro per construction of the Constitution, as originally adopted, furnished. In this they resolve-'l that nothing should be left in doubt. • They determined, therefore, not only to guard him against executive and judicial, but against Con ressional abuse. With that view, they adopted the fifth Constitutional amendment, which declares that "no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a pre sentment, or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the mjlitia when in active service in time of war or public danger." , , This exception is designed to leave in force, not to enlarge, the power vested in Congress by tbe original Constitution, "to make rules for the government and regulation ofthe land and naval forces." "The land or naval forces'* are the terms used iir both, bave tbe same meaning, and until lately bave been supposed by every Sommentator and judge to exclude from military juris- lction offenses committed by citizens not belonging to such forces; Kent, in a note to his I Com., p. 341, States, and witb accuracy, tbat "military and naval crimes and offenses committed while the party is attached to and under the immediate authority of tbe army and navy of the United States; andin actual service, are not cognizable under tbe common law jurisdiction of the Courts ' of the United States." According to this great'autbority, every other class of persons, and every other species of offense are within tbe jurisdiction of thecivil Courts, and entitled totbeprotection of the proceeding by presentment or indictment, and a public trial in such a Court! It the Constitutional amendment has not tbat effect, it it does not secure that protection to all.whodo not belong to the army or navy, then the provisions in tbe sixth amendment are equally inoperative. They, "in all criminal prosecutions," give the accused a right.to a speedy and publip trial a right to be informed of the nature and cause ofthe accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses againsthim; to compulsory process for his witnesses, and the assistance of counsel. The exception in the fifth amendment of cases arising in the land or naval forces applies, by necessary implica tion at least, in part to this. To construe this as not containingthe exception would defeat tbe purpose of tbe exception. For the provisions Of the sixth amend ment, unless they are subject to the exceptions ofthe fifth, would be inconsistent with the fifth. The sixth is, therefore, to be construed as if it in words contained tbe exception. It is submitted that this is evident. The consequence is, that if the exception can be made to include those who, in the languageof Kent, are not, when tbe offense was committed, "attached to and utader the immediate authority efltbe army or navy, and in actual service, ' the securities designed for other citizensby tbe sixth article are wholly nugatory. If a Military Commis sion, created by the mere, authority of thePresident, Can deprive a citizen of *tbe benefit of the guaranties secured by the fifth amendment, it can deprive' him of those secured by the sixth". It may deny him the right to "a speedy and public trial," information "of the nature and cause of the accusation," of the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him," of "compulsory proeess for his witnesses," and of "the as sistance of counsel for his defense." That this can beidone no one has, as yet maintained. No opinion, however latitudinarian, of executive power, of the effect of public necessity in war or in peace, to enlarge its sphere, and authorize a disregard of its limitations— no one, however convinced he may be of tbe policy of protecting accusing witnesses from a public examination under the idea tbat their testimony cannot otherwise be obtained, and that consequently crime may go unpunished, has to1}his time been found to go to that extent. Certainly no writer has ever maintained such a doctrine. Argument to refute it ifi unnecessary. It refutes itself. For, if sound, tbe sixth amendment, which our fathers thought so vital to in- dividualiiberty, when assailed by governmental pro secution, is but a bead letter, totally inefficient tor its purpose whenever the Government- shalPdeem it pro per to try a citizen by a military commission. Against such a doctrine the very instincts ot freemen revolt. It has no foundation but in the principle ot unre strained, tyrannic power, and passive obedience. If it be Well founded, then are we indeed a nation of slaves and not of freemen. If the Executive can legally decide whether a citi zen is to enjoy tbe guaranties of liberty afforded by the Constitution, what are webutslaves? If thePresident, or any of his subordinates, under any pretense what ever, can deprive a citizen of such guaranties, liberty with us, however loved, is not enjoyed. But the Cotir stltution is not so fatally defective. It is subject to no such reproach. In war and in peace it is equally po tential for the promotion ofthe general welfare, and as involved in and necessary to such welfare lor the protection of the individual citizen. Certainly, until this Bebellion, this has been the proud and cherished conviction of the country. And it is to this conviction and the assurance tbat it could never be -shaken th^t our past prosperity Is to be referred. God forbid that mere power, dependent for its exercise on'Executive will (a condition destructive of political and social -happiness), shall ever be substituted in its place. Should that unfortunately ever occur, unless it was soon corrected by the authority of the people, the ob jects of our BeVOlutionairy struggle, the sacrifices of our ancestors and- the design' of the Constitution will all have been in vain. I proceed now to examine with somewhat of particu larity the grounds on which I atn informed your jurisdiction is maintained. ¦ ¦ I. That it as an incident.of the vfar power. That power, whatever be its extent, is exclusively in Congress. War can only be declared by that body. With its origin, the President has no concern what ever. Armies, which are necessary, can only be raised by the same body. Not a soldier, without its authority, can be brought intoservice by tho Executive. He is as impotent to that end as a private citizen. And armies, too, when- raised by Congressional au thority, can only be governed and regulated by "rules" prescribed by the same*authority. The Executive pos sesses no power over the soldiefi, except such as Con gress may, by legislation, confer upon him. If, then, it was true that the creation of a military commission like the present is Incidental tathe war power, it must be authorized by the Department to which tbat power 160 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. belongs, and not by the Executive, to whom no portion belongs. ., ' And if it be said to be involved In the , power "to make rules for the government and-regulation of the land and naval forces," the result is the same. It .must be dorie by Congress, to whoni that power, also. exclusively belongs, and nothy the Executive. Has Congress, then, under, either power, authorized such a Commission as this, to try such cases, as these? It is confidently asserted that it has not. If it has, let the statute be produced. It is certainly not dope by that of the 10th ot April. 1806, "establishing , articles for the government ot the armies of the United States." No military courts are there mentioned or provided for but courts-martial and courts of inquiry. .And tbeir mode of appointment and organization and of proceeding, and the authority ;vested in them, are also prescribed. Military Commissions- are not only not authorized, but, are not even alluded to. And, consequently, the parties, whoever these may be.who, under that act, can be tried by courts-martial or courts of inquiry, are not made subject , to-, trial by a military, commission. Nor is such a tribunal mentioned in any prior statute, or in any subseauen tune, until those of the nth of July, '62* and of the ,3d, of March, '68. In the 5th section ofthe first, the records of "military commissions'* are; to be, returned ior revision to tbe Judge Advocate-General, whose appointment it also provides for. But how such , commissions are to be constituted ^wbat powers they are to have„how their proceedings are to be conducted, or whatcases and parties they are to try, are not provided for. In the 38th section of the second, they are mentioned as com petent to try persons "lurking or acting as spies." The same absence in the particularsstated in respect to the first are true of this. ., .. , And as re ards this act of 1863, this reflection forcibly represents itself. If military -commissions can be created, and from their very nature, possess jurisdic tion to try all alleged military , offenses (the ground on which -your jurisdiction is said in part to res,t), why was it necessary to give them the power, by express words, to -try persons "lurking or acting as .spies?" The military character of such an offense could not bave been doubted. What reason, then, cari be sug gested for conferring tbe power by express language than that without it it would not be possessed? Before these statutes were passed a commissipn called ;a Mili tary Commission, had been issued by tbe Executive to Messrs. Davis, Holt and Campbell, to examine, into' certain military claims against the Western Depart ment, and Congress, by its resolution ot thellthcf March, 1862, (No. 18), provided for the payment of its awards. Against a commission of that character no objection can be made. It is but ancillary to the auditing .of demands upon the Government, and in no Tyay interferes with any constitutional right of the ci- "fcjzen. But; until this Bebellion. a military commis sion like tne present, organized in a loyal State or ter- . ritory, where the courts are openand their proceedings unobstructed, clothed with the jurisdiction attempted to be conferred upon you, a jurisdiction involving not only the liberty but tne lives of tbe parties on trial, it fa confidently stated is not to be iound sanctioned or the most remotely recognized or even alluded to by any writer on military law in England or the United States, or in any legislation of either country, it has its origin in the Bebellion , and, like the dangerous he resy of Secession, out of which that sprung, nothing is more certain, in my opinion* than that, however purethe motives of Its origin, it will be an almost equfi$y dangerous heresy to constitutional liberty, and, the Bebellion ended, perish with the other, then apd forever. But to proceed. Such commissions were authorized by Lieutenant-General Scott in his Mexican campaign. When he obtained possession of ,the City,of Mexico be, on the 17th of September, 1847, republished, with additions, his order of the 19th of February preceding, declaring martial law. By this order he authorized the trial of certain offenses by military commissions, regulated tbeir proceedings, and limited the punish ments tbey might inflict. From their jurisdiction, however, he excepts cases "clearly cognizable by court-martial," and in words limits the eases tobe tried to such as are (I quote) ".not provided for in the act of Congress establishing rules and articles for the Government of the armies of tbe United States." of the joth of April, 1806. And he further tells us that even, this order- so li mited and so called for by the greatest ^public neces sity, when handed to the then Secretary of War (Mr Marcy) "for his approval," "a startle at the title (mar tial-law order) was tbe only comment he fehpn or ever made on the subject," and that it was "soon silently returned as too explosive for safe handling." "A little later (he adds) the Attomey*General (Mr. Cashm-*! called aud asked for a copy, and the law officer of the Government, whose business it ia to speak on all such mattess, was stricken witb legal dumbness." (B>.) How much more startled and more- paralyzed would these great men have been had they been consulted. o*> such a commission as this ! A Co mmission not to sit iu an other country, and to. .try offenses not provided for by any law of the United states, civil or military, then iu force, but in their awn couiUry^and in a i,art of it where; there ai»o laws providing for their trial and punishment, and. civil courts clothed with ample pow ers for both, fand in the daily and undisturbed exer cise of their jurisdiction; and where, if there should"' beau attempt at disturbance by a force which tbey, had not the power to control, tbey could invoke (and it would be his duty to afford it) the President to use the military power at his command, and wbicb every body knows to beample for tbe purpose. The second clause of the order mentions, among other offenses to be so tried, '-assassination, murder, poisoning," andin the fourth (correctly Tas I submit, wltb all respect for a contrary opinion) be states thai "the rules and articles of war" So not provide ior the punishment of any one of the designated ;otfenses^ "even when committed by individuals of the army, upon the persons or property of other individuals of the same, except in the very restricted case ofthe ninth of the articles." The authority for even this restricted Commission, Scott, not more eminent as a soldier than civilian, placed entirely upon the ground that the named offenses, if committed in a Xoreign eountry by' American troops, could not be punished under any law. of the, United states then in force. ''The Constitution of the United States and the rules and articles 'of war," hesaid, and said correctly, provided no court for their trial or punishment, "no matter by whom or on whom" committed- (Scott's Autobiography, 31*2.), Ifit be suggested tbat-tbecivilcourtsandjuriesfor this District could not safely be relied upon for the trial of these cases, because either of incompetency, disloyalty; orcorruption.it would be an unjust reflection upon tb£ judges, upon. the, people, upon the Marshal, an ,api pointeeaf it he President, by whom the juries are sum moned, and, upon our civil institutions theiriselvea. the very 'institutions on whose integrity and, intelli gence the safety of our property, liberty, and lives our ancestors thought could not onlywe saiely vested, but wouldbesafe nowhere else. If it besuggestedi that a secret trial-. : in wfaple or in part, as the .Executive might deem, expedient, could not be had before any other than a military Tribunal, the answer -is that tbe Constitution, fin all criminal prosecutions," gives the accused the " right" to a ''public trial." So abhorrent were private trials to our ancestors, so fatal did tbey deem them to individual security, that they were de nounced, and as they no doubt thought, ao guarded: against as in all future time to be impossible. If it be suggested that witnesses may be unwilling, to testityj the answer is tbat tbey may be compelled to appear and made to testify. But the suggestion upon another ground is equally without force It rests on the idea that theguilty onlst are ever brought to trial; that the only object of th© Constitution and the laws in this regard is to afford' tha means to establish the alleged guilt. That accusation, however made, is to be esteemed prima facia presump tion of guilt, and that the Executive should be armed. without other restriction than his own discretion with all the appliances deemed by bim necessary to make the presumption conclusive- Never was there a more dangerous theory. The peril tothe citizeu from a pro* secution so conducted* as illustrated in all history, the very elementary principles of constitutional liberty the spirit and .letter ofthe Constitution itself, renu? dlate it. . Innocent parties, sometimes by private malice; sometimes for a mere partisan purpose, sometimes from a supposed public policy, bave been made the subjects of criminal accusation. History is full of such instances. How are such parties to be protected it a public trial, atthe option of the Executive, can be de nied them, and a secret one, in whole or in part, sub stituted? If the names ofthe witnesses and their evi dence are not published, what obstacle does it notiib terpose to establish their innocence? The character of the. witnesses against them may be all-important to that- end. Kept in prison, with no means of consulting the outer world, how can those who may know the witnesses be aole to communicate with them, on the subject? A trial so conducted; though it may not, as no doubt is the case in the pre* sent, be intended to procure tbe punishment of any but the guilty, it is obvious subjects the innocent to great danger. It partakes more of the character of the inquisition, which the enlightened civilization of the age has driven almost 'Wholly out of existence than of a tribunal suited to a free people. In tha palmiest days of that tribunal, kings as well as ceonio stood abashed in its presence ana dreaded its power.- The accused, was never informed of the names of his accusers. Heresy suspected was ample ground ior arrest; accomplices and criminals were received its witnesses, airi the whole trial was secret, and corf* ducted in a chamber almost as silent as the Brave It was long, since denouaced by the civinzert world; not because it might at times punish tho heretic (taen! ^,XIpiaK0UK0^ali 'riSlitfiil human power, deemed a in1™^' ^utbecause it was as likely to punish tha S?ffifS^*ueeiuJ.tyj.,,A'naQlto trial* therefore, by S^l™^1106*01 :wftessea and the testimony ara given, even in monarohiad and despotic governments is now esteemed amply adeqnateto ma i^sSof it be that this is not true of usr Can it be ihat a seen* trial, wnolly or partially, if the Executive &t> ilecieu-&; TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 161 Is all that an American citizen is entitled to? Such a I the government and regulation of the land forces,'* doctrine, if maintained by an English monarch, would shakehis government to its very centre, and if perse vered in would losebim his crown, it will be no an swer to these observations to say that this, particular trial has been only in part a secret one, arid that se crecy will never be resorted to except for purposes of justice. The reply is that trie principle itself is incon sistent with American liberty as recognized and se cured by constitutional guaranties. It cupposes that whether these guaranties are to be enjoyed in the par ticular case, and to. what extppt, is dependent ori Executive 'wili. The Cpristitutiqn in this regard is de signed to secure therh in spite of such Will. Its patriotic authors intended to place the citizen, in this particular, wholly beyond thp ppwer, not only of the Executive, biit of every department of tbeGovern- ment. They deemed tbe right to a public trial vital to the security df the' citizen, and especially and abso lutely necessary to his protection against Executive power. A pubUc trial. ot all criminal prosecutioris they therefore secured in general and unqualified terms. What would these great men have said bad they. been asked so'to qualify the terms as to warrant its refusal nnder ahy circumstances, andxnakeit dependent Upon Executive discretion ? The member who made the in- Jiuiry would have been 'deemed by them a traitor to iberty or insane. What would they have said if told . that without such qiialificatiob the Executive would pe able legally to impose it as incidental to Executive Eower? If not received with derision, it would have een indignantly rejected as an imputatipnupon those who at any time thereafter should legally fill the office. H. Let me present the question in another View. If such a commission as this, for the trial of cases like trie present, can be legally constituted/pan it bp done by Mere Executive authority?1 ' ', ,. "1. YOu are a court,, and', If, legally existing, endowed with ri momentous power, the highest known to man, that of passing upon, tup liberty or life of the citizen. By the express words ofthe Constitution, au army can only be raised and governed, and regulated bylaws passed by Congress. In the exercise of the power tp rule and govern it, the act before referred to. of the 10th of April, lSOfi, establishing the articles of war, was passed. That act provides only for courts-martial and courtsof inquiry,aOd designates the cases to be tried before each, and thp laws that are to govern the trial. Military commissions are not riaentioned, and, of course, the act contains no provision for their govern ment. Now, it is submitted as, perfectly clear that the creation -of a court, whether civil or military, is an ex clusive legislative function, belonging to thedepart- meritupon which the legislative power is conferred. The jurisdiction of such a court, and the laws and regulations ttrguide and govern it, is also exclusively legislative. What cases are to be tried by it, how tbe Judges are to be selected, and how qualified; wbat are o be tbe rules of evidence, arid what punishments are to be inflicted, all solely belong to tbe .same de partment. The very element of constitutional lib erty, recognized by all modern writers on government as essential to its security, and carefully incorporated tito our Constitution, is a separation oi the legislative, uflicial and executive powers.! ^Thattbisseparationis made in our Constitution no one will deny. Article Jstdeclares that "all legislative powers herein granted shall be Vested in a Congress." Article 2d vests "the executive power" in a President, and article 3d, "the judicial power in certain desig nated courts, arid in courts to be thereafter constituted " by Congress."' ¦ There could not be a more careful '•Segregation of the three pp wers. , If, then, courts^their laws, modes of ^proceeding and judgments, belong to -legislation (and this, I suppose, will not be questioned,), •*a' the absence of legislation in regard to this court and rt&jnrisdiction to try the present cases, it has for that purpose no legal existence or authority. The Execu tive, whose functions are' altogether executiye. cannot cbnter'lt. The offenses to be tried by I,t, the laws to govern fts proceedings, the punishment it may award, cannot, for the same reason, be prescribed by the Exe cutive. These, as well as the mere constitution of the court.all exclusively belong to Congress. If it be contended that tbe Executive has the powers in questiombeeause byimplication they are involved iu the warpowerorinthePresident'sconstitutional tunc- tion,asCommauder-in-Chiefofthearmy,thpn this con sequence would follow, that tbey would not be subject to Congressional control, as that department has no morerlgbtto interfere with the power pf the Execu tive than that power has a right to interfere with that of Congress. If this be so, if by implication the powers in question belong1, to the Executive, be rnay not only constitute and regulate military commissions find prescribe the- laws for their government, but all e^isiation upon tbesu&gec'tby CongTesswould be usur pation That the proposition leads to this result wpuld seem to be clear, and if it does, that result itself w, so Inconsistent with all previous legislation and all Exe cutive practice, and sb repugnant toevpry principle of constitutional IIberty);tbat }t demonstrates its utter 0 Under thepowergi ven to Congress "to make rules for they bave, irom time to time, up to and including the act of the 10th. of April. 1S0G, and since, enacted such rules, as Lhey deemed tobe necessary, a3 well in war as in peace, and their authority to do so has never been denied. This power, too, to govern and regulate, from its very nature, is exclusive. Whatever is not done under it is to be considered as purposely omitted. The words used id the delegation or'the power "govern and regulate," necessarily embrace the entire subject, and exciqdeall like authority in others. The end of such a power cannot be attained except, through uniformity Of government 'and regulation, and this is not to be attained, if the power is in two hands, i ' To be effective, therefore, :it must be in one* and tbe Constitution gives. it to one, to, Congress, iu express terms, and nowhere Intimates a purpose to bestow it* or any portion of it, upon any other department. In the absence,. then, of all mention of military commis sions in ! the Const itutipn, and in tbe presence of the sole authority it comers on Congress by rules of its own enacting, to govern and regulate the army, and in the absence of all mention of such conmrssions in tue act oftheiQthof April, 180ii„ahd of a single word in that act. or in any other, how can the power be considered as m, 'the President? Further, upon what ground) other than those I have examined, can his authority be placed. , Jt is stated that tbe constitutional guaranties re ferred to are designed only for a state of peace. There ii nob a syllable in the. instrument tbat justifies, even plausibly, such a qualification. These are secured by the most general arid comprehensive terms, wholly inconsistent with any restriction. They are also not oply not confined to a condition of peace, but are more peculiarly necessary to the security of personal liberty inwar than in peace. All history telis us that war, at tiroes, maddpns the people, frenzies the Govern ment, and makes both regardless of constitutional limitations of power.' Individual safety at such periods is more in peril than at any other. Constitutional limi tations and (guaranties are then also absolutely neces- . sary.tp the protection pf the Government itself. The maxina ''saluspqpuli.supremaest lex" isbutflt for a tyrant's use. Under its pretense tbe grossest wrongs havebee:i.committed< the most awful crimes perpetrated, and every principle of-ireedom violated^ until at, last, worn, down by suffering, the people, in .very despair, have,acquipsced in a resulting despotism- The safety, whicb liberty needs, and without whicb it sickens and dies, is that which law, and not mere . un licensed human will, affords. The Aristotelian maxim, satus publica suprema est lex," "let the public weal be under the protection of the law," is the true and only safe maxim. Nature without law would be chaoa, government without law, anarchy, or despotism. Against both, in war and in peace, the Constitution happily protects us. - If tbe power in question Is claimed under the autho rity supposed to be given the President in certain cases to suspend the writ of habeas corpus and to declare martial flaw, thp claim is equally if not more evidently-' untenable. Because the first of these powers, if given to the President at all, is giyen "when in cases of re bellion or. Invasion," he deems the public safety re quires it. I think he has this power, but there are great and patriotic names who think otherwise. ~But if be has it. or if it be in Congress alone, it is entirely untrue that,its, exercise works any other, result than the sus pension of the writ— the temporary suspension of the right or having the cause of arrest passed upon at once by theciviljudges. Itin noway impairs or suspends tbe other rights secured to the accused. In wbat court he is to, be tried, how he is to be tried. wbat evidence is to be admitted, and wbat judgment pronounced, arp all to be, what the Constitution se cures, and the laws provided in similar cases, when there is no suspension of the writ. The purpose of tne writ is merely, without delay, to ascertain the legality ofthearrest.. If adjudged legal, the party is detained; If illegal, discharged. But in.either contingency, when he is called to answer any criminal accusation, and be is a civilian and not subject to the articles of war, con stitutionally enacted by Congress, it must be done by presentment or indictment, and his trial be had in a civil court, having, by State or Congressional legisla tion, jurisdiction over tbe crime.aod under laws go- vernirig the tribunal and defining the punishment. The very fact, too, that express power is given in a certain condition of things, to suspend the writ re ferred to, arid that' no power is given to suspend, or deny any ofthe other securities .for personal liberty provided by.the' Constitution, is conclusive to show that all^he latter Were designed to be in force "in cases of rebellion or invasion," as well as in a stateofiperfect pe ce and, safety. III'. I have already referred to the act of 1806, esta blishing tbe articles of war, and, said, wbat must be ad mitted, that it provides for no military court like this: but, for argument's sake, let it be admitted. And- I then maintain, with becoming confidence and due re spect for ^different ppiniop, that U does nob embrace the crimes charged against these parties or the parties themselves. . First. Thp charge la a traitorous conspiracy to take 162 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. the lives of the designated persons, "in aid of the 'exist ing armed Rebellion."1 Second. That in' the execution of the. conspiracy the actual murder of the late Presi dent arid tue attempted murder of the Secretary of State occurred. Throughout the chargeand its specifi cations the consp. racy and its attempted execution are alleged to have been traitorous. The accusation, therefore, is not'one merely 'of murder, but of murder designed and part accomplished with traitorous pur pose. If the charge is true and the intent (which is madeasubstantial part of It) be also true, then the crime is treason and not simple murder. . Treasonagainstthe United States, as defined by the Constitution, can "consist only in levying wair against them or in adhering to their eneriiies, giving them aid and comfort." (3d article.) ¦* This deilnition not only tells us what treason is, but that nO other Prime thari the defined^one should be considered the offense. Arid the same .section provides tbat "no person, shall be convicted of .treason except on the testiniohy of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on* confession m open court," and gives to Congress the power to declare what its punishment shall be. The offense in the general is the same as in England. In that country, at no period since its freedom became settled, has any other treason been recognized. In tne pendency of this Bebellion (never beiore) it has been alleged that there exists with us the offense of military' treason, punishable by the laws of war. It is so stated in the instructions of Gerieral Halleck to the then commanding officer in Tennessee, of the 5th of March, 1863. (Lawrence's Wheaton, suppt., p. 41.) But Halleck confines it to acts committed against the army of abelllgererit,when Occupying the terri tory of the enemy. And he says, Wha't Is certainly true, if such an offense can be. committed, that it "is broadly distinguished from the treason defined in the constitutional and statutory laws and-madepunisbable by the civil courts." But the lerrn military* treason is hot to be found In any English work or military order, or, before this Bebellion, in 'any American authority. It has evidently been adopted during the Bebellion "as a doctrine of military law, On.the authority of conti nental writers in governments less free than those of England and the United* States, and in whib'h,' because they are less free, treason is not mdde to consist of specific acts-, and no others. But if Halleck is right, arid ail our prior practice, and that of England, from Whom we derive ours, is to be abandoned, the cases before you are not cases Of "military treason," as he defines it. Wheri the of fenses alleged' in tbese cases are stated to have oc curred in this District^ tbe United States were not and did not claim to be in its occupation as a belligerent. nor was it pretended'that the people of this District ¦were, in a belligerent" sense, enemies. On the' con-' ttrary. they were citizens; entitled to every right of citizenship. Nor were the parties on trial enemies. They wene either citizens of the District or of Mary- < laud, and under the protection of tne Constitution: The offense charged, then, being treason, it is treason ¦ as known to thp> Constitution and laws, and can only be tried and punished as they provide. To consider these parties belligerents, and their al leged offense military treason, is not only unwar ranted by the authority of Hallecki'but is indirect -c6nflict with the Constitution and istWs, which the Pre- ¦sldent and all of us ate hound to support and defend. ¦The offense;, then, being treason, as known tb. the 'Constitution, its trial by a military eoilrt is clearly il legal. And this for obvious reasons. Under the Con stitution nO conviction of such! an offense can be had "unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the overt act, or on confession in open court." And under the laws the parties are entitled to have "a copy ofthe in dictment and alist ofthe jury and witnesses, with the names and places of abode of both, at least three en tire days before the trial," They also bave the right to challenge peremptorily thirty-five of the jury, and to challenge fbi* cause without limitation. And, filially, unless" the indictment Shall he friuhd by a grand jury within three years next after the treason ¦done or committed, they shall not be persecuted, tried 'or punished (act 30th April, 1790, 1 Stat, at large, pp. -H8, no). Upon what possible ground, therefore, can -this Commission possess the jurisdiction ciafmecl fofr -It? It is not alleged that it Is subject to the provision's stateavand in its very nature it is iinpossible thatit should be. The very saleguards designed by the Con stitution , if it has such jurisdictirin, are Wholly unavail ing. Trial by juryln all cases Pur English ancestors "deemed (as Story correctly tells us) "the great bulwark of their civil and political liberties, and watched with ¦an unceasing jealousy and solicitude." It cdristitute'd tone of the fundamental articles of Magria Charts, ltnullus liber homo capiapir nee imprisonetur aut exulet out aliquo nodo, destruatur' &c, nistpcr legale judicium parium suorum, velper legem terra." This great right the American colonists brought with them as their birthright and Inheritance. It landed with' them at Jamestown and, on the rock of 'Plymouth, arid was equally prized by Cavalier and'Priritan, and ever since. tothe breaklngorit ofthe Rebellion, has been enjoyed and esteemed the protection aud proud privilege of their posterity. At times during the Rebellion it has been disregarded and denied. Tbe momentous nature ofthe crisis brought ahout by that, stupendous crime, invdiving as it did the, veryliie of the nation, has caused the people to tolerate such disregard and de nial. But thecrisis, thank Godl has passed. Tbe au thority ofthe Government throughout our territorial limits is reinstated so firmly that reflecting men /her© and elsewhere are convinced that' tbe da-rig'er has passed n^Ver to return. % , , i The result proves that the principles on whieh the. Government rests have imparted to it a vitality that \vill cause it to endurefor, all time, in spite of foreign invasion or domestic insurrectipn; and. one of tjuose principles, the choicest one, is the right incases or "criminal prosecutions to a speedy and publje trial by< an impartial jury," and in cases of treason to tbe addi? tiona) securities before adverted to. The great, purpose of Magna Charta and the" Constitution was (to quote vStory a^gain) "to guard against- a spirit .of, oppression and tyranny on the part of rulers, aud against a spirit of violence and vjndictiyenesj3j on the part of tlie people." The apppal for^afety can, under such cir- cumstances, scarcely be made by innocence, in, any other manner than by the severe "control of courts of jusxipe, and by the firrri and indpartial verdibt of ajurjr sworn to do right, and guided solely by legal evidence and a sense of duty. In such a course there if*, a double security against the prejudices of judges who may par take ot the wishes and opinions of, the Government, and against -yiepassions of the multitude, who may demand their victim- w|tb a clamorous precipitancy." And Mr. Justice Blackstorie, with the same deep sense of Its value, meets tbe prediction of a foreign wri t er, ' 'that because Ronae, Sparta, Crirthage havelost their liberties,, those of :England in time must perish," by rPrriindingbini "that Borne, SP>rta, and Carthage, at the tiriae when their liberties were lost, viere.sbrangeri toihetriaXby^ur'y." (3 Bla„p. 379.) That a right sd y alped and esteemed by our fathers to be necessary; td civil libjerty.fco important to the very existence o'f a free government, was designed by them to be made to depend for its enjoyment npqn the war power, oriipon any power intrusted to any department of our Govern ment, is a reflection on their intelligence, and patri otism. IV. But to proceed. The articles of war, If tbey pror videdfor the punishment of tbe crimes on trial, and authp^izedsuch a court as this, do not include such parties as are on' trial; and, untiftbe Rebellion, I, am noi»aware that a different construction was ever intf- fiiated. Itis the excluslyp fruit of the Rebellion. The title of the act declaring the articles is "an act for establishirig rules and articles for the government o t the armies of the united States." The first section states that "the following shall be the mips and articles by whicb the armies of the United States shall be governed," and every other article, except the 56th abd 57th, are in words confined to persons belonging'to the army in some capacity or other. I uuderstand it to beheld bysome that because such Words are not used in the two articles referred to. it was the design of Congress ,to include persons who do not belong to the aTiny* In riiy judgment, this ia a wholly untenable construction; but if tfwas a correct one, it would not justify the use sought to be made of it. It would hot bring these parties, tbr their alleged crimes, befpre.a military courc known tothe act, per- xainly'riot before a Sanitary commission, a court, un known to the acL ' The offenses charged are a traitor ous conspiracy, arid , murder committed in pursuance of it. Neither offense, if indeed two are charged, is embraced by either the Beth or 57th , articles of tha statute. The 56th prohibits the relieving the enemy with money, Victuals, or ammunition, or, knowingly 'harboring and.protectfrig him. Sophistry.itself cannot bring the offenses in question under this article. The 57th prohibits only.the "holding correspondence with, or giving intelligence to, tbe enemy, either directlv or indirectly," It Js equally clear that the ofierisesin question are not within this provision. But, in fact, the two articles relied upon admit of no such construction as is understood to be claimed This is thought opvious, not only from the general charac ter of the bet, aridof all the other articles it contains, but because the one immediately preceding, like all those preceding and succeeding it, other than the fifty- sixth and fifty-seVehth, Include only persons belong ing tothe "afhiies di the United States." Itslanguaga is, 'Svhosoeyrir belonging to the armies of tbe United States employed in foreign parts,", shall dotheaqt pronibited, Shall suffer tbe prescribed punishment. Now.it is a familiar rule of interpretation, perfectly wellBtettlpdlnsuchacase, that unless there.be some- thmg iri the following sections that clearly shows a purpose to baake them morecomprehepsive than their imtnedlate predecessors, tbey are to be construed as subject to the same limitation. So far from therebeing in this instance any evidence of a different purpose, the declared object of tbe*Statute. evidenced by its title, its first section., and its general contents, are ail inconsistent with any other construction. Aud when to tb\ia it is Considered that the power ex- erclsedby Congress in passing the statute was merely the constitutional ofle to make rules for the govern ment andreguUtion of the array., it is doiug great in justice to tnat department to suppose that, in exercis ing it, they designed to legislate for any other class, TRJAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 163 . . — - ~^, .. vjvw^v. T v a j U i .. ci|.|iij\,(LL-n. uv II..'.- •;•>: . . ¦ annequaly qualify the same word "whosoever' used in each ot them. And, finally, upon th,is, point I am supported by, the authority of Lieutenant-General Scott. The Commission bave seen from my previous reference to his "Autobiography," tbat be placedhis right to issue his martial-law order, establishing. amongst other thines, military commissions to ,try Certain offenses in a iqrelgn country, upon the ground that otherwise they "would go unpunished, and his army become demoralized. One of these offenses was murder 'commiDied or attempted, and for *such , an offense he teUs lis that the articles of war provided rid court for their trial and punishment, "no matter by whom or*on whrina. committed." And" this opinion is repeated in the fourth clause-o^'his Order',as irue of all the desia-riut^d offenses, "except in the very restricted case iiithenintb ofthe articles." V. There are dther views which I submit to the seri ous attention of the Commission:— The mode ot pro- ceedingina court like this, and which has been pur sued by the prosecution with your approval, because fleemed legalby both, is so inconsistent with the pro ceedings pf civil courts, as regulated for ai?es by es~ JabUsbedlaw/that the fact, I think, derrionstrates tbat persons not belonging to the army cahnpt be subjected to such a jurisdiction. 1. The character , of the plead ings. The off nse charged is a conspiracy with persons not within the-reach of tbe cPurt. and some of theria in a'ioreign country, to commit tbe alleged crime. To give you jurisdiction, the design of the accused ,and their co-conspirators is averred to have been to aid the Jtebelhon,and to perfect; that- end, not, qnly by the murder ofthe President rindLieutenanf-peueralGrantj but of the VicePresiderit and Secretary of State. It is further averred that thePresident being murdered, the Vice President becoming thereby President, and as fluch Commander-in-Chief, the purpose was, to murder him, and, a3 in tine-contingency Of the death or1*- both, it would be the dutv of the Secretary of State to cause an election to bfrheldiOrPresidentahdVice President. hewas'to be murdered in order to prevent a "'lawiul election" ortheseofficers, and that by a)l thesp. riieans "aidaUd comiort" were to be given "the insurgents engaged in armed Rebellion against the United Stales," and "the subversion and overthrow o fine Constitution iandlawsof tbeUaited States" thereby effected. lhat such pleadings as this Would not be tolerated in acivil court,! suppose every lawyer will concede. It is argumentative, arid even in that character un sound. The continuance Of our Government does not depend oh the lives of any or all of its public servants. As iact6r law, therefore, the pleading is iatally defec tive. " The Government pas an inherent ppwer to pre serve Itself, which uo conspiracy to murdver or murder pan in-the slightest' degree impair. And the result .whicb we'bave just witnessed proves this, and shows the folly of themadman and fiend by whose bands our late Jamerite'd President fell. He doubtless thought that bedoqe a,deed,tbat would subvert the- "Constitu tion and laws'." We'know, that ithadhot eyen^ atep; dency to that result. Not a power of the Government was suspended. All progressed ,as before, ..the dire catastrophe. A cherished and almost, idolized citizen wassnatchedfrpmusby the assassin's arm, but there was no halt in the march of the Government. That continued in all- it? majesty, -wholly .unimpeded. Tbe onlv effect was to place thenationin tears and drape it in mourning, and to awake thesyiripathy and excite the indignation of the world. But this mpde ot' pleading renders impossible the rules of evidence known to the civil courts. It Justi fies, in/the opinion or; tha Judge Advocate a,nd ihe Court (or what has b'ee'p WoUian.pt havebeen ,done)-a latitude that no civil' Court, would allow, as in the judgment of such a court tbe accused, however inno cent, could not be supposed able to meet it. Proof has been received not only of distinct offenses from those charged, but of such offenses committed by others than -'the parties on trial. Even in regard to tbe party him self, othpr offenses alleged to have been previously committed by him cannot be proved. Atone time a different practice, prevailed in England, anddoesmow, it is believed, in some ofthe Contirien^l Governments. 'But since the days Of Lord Holt (a name-venerated by lawyers and all admirers,Qf enlightened jurisprudence) It has lot, prevailed in England. In the case ot Harr ¦risan, tried before that Judge ior murder, the counsel for theOovernment offered a witness to prove some ¦felonious design ofthe prisoner tb --ee years before. BColt indignantly exclaimed, VHold! ho d! whatare ¦you doing now? Ho\v can he defend himself from charges or" which.be has no notice.? And how. many issues are to be raised to perplex ihe, and the jury t Awavt away! thatOught not to be-that is-nothmg to -tbematter.''--ri2 State Trials, 883, 874.] I refer to. this case not to, assail v wbat has been done in theseeases entitled to the benefit of this rule, ope never departed from in such .courts, they would.not have had proved aeainst them crimes alleged to have been commuted by Others, and having nO necessary or legal connection with^hose charged. With the same view, and not de* uying thp right of the Commission in the particular easel am about to refer to, but to show tbat the Con stitution could not have designed to subject -citizens to the practice, I cite thesame judge to prove that in a civil court those parties could not have been legally lettered during their trial. Inthe case of Canburn, accused as implicated in the V assassination plot" on trial before the same judgei H-ltputanend to what Lord Campbell terms "tha revolting practice of trying criminals in fette.s." Hearing the clank of chains, though no complaint was made to him, hesaid:— ' I should like to know why the prisoner is brought inironed. Letthem be instantly knocked off, When prisoners are tried they should stand at their ease." (13 State Trials, 221, I'd Campbell Lives Chief Justices, 140). Finally, I deny the junsdio* tion of the Commission, not only because ne trier Con stitution nor laws, justify, but on the contrary repui diateit^but on the ground that all the experienceof the past is against it. Jefferson , ardent in tne prosecur tion o* Burr. and. solicitous for his conviction, from a firm belief of bis guilt.- .never suggested that he should be tried belor& any other than acivil court. Andia that trial, so ably presided over by Marshall, thepri soner was allowed to "stand at his ease,' was granted every Constitutional privilege, and no evidence per* mitted to be given against him but sucbasapivil court recognizes; and in that case as in this, the^over* throw ofthe Government was the alleged purpose; and yet it was not intimated in any quarter that he could be tried by a military tribunal. > In England, too. the doctrine on which this prdsecuv tion is placed is unknown. Attempts were made to assassinate Oeorge the Tbird-and the present Queen, and Mr. Percival, then Prime Minister, was- assassina- ted as he entered the House of Commons. In the two first instances the . design was to murder the een> mander-in-chief of England's army and navy, in whomy too, tbe whole war power of the Government was also vested. In the last, a Secretary, clothed with powers' as great at least as those that belong to our Secretary ofState. And yet, in each, the parties ac cused were tried before. a civil court, no ©ne suggest- ing any other. And during the period of the Prericb Revolution, when its principles, if principles they can be termed, were being inculcated to an extent thafr alarmed tpe Government, and caused it to exertevery power it possessed to frustrate their effect, when -the writ of fta&eas corpus was suspended, and arrests and prosecutions resorted to almost without limit, no tine suggested a trial except in the civil courts. And yet the apprehension ofthe Government was tbat-the object, of tbe alleged conspirators was to subvertiits authority, bring t£bout its overthrow, and subject the kingdom to the horrors ofthe French Revolution, i then shocking the nations of the world. Hardy, Foster and others were tried by civil courts* and their names remembered for the principles off freedom that were made triumphant mainly by the efforts of 4*that great (in tbe Words ofa modern Eng lish statesman) genius, 'Earl Bussell,1 whose sword and buckler protected justice and freedom during the disastrous period," having "tbetongue of Cicero-apd the soul of Hampden, an invincible 'orator and att undaunted patriot"— Erskine. As itwas tbese trials were conducted with so relentless a spirit, and, It was thought, witb such disregard of the rights ofthe subject, tbat the administration of the day were not able to withstand the torrent of tbe people's indig nation. What would have been the fate, individually as well as politically, ir the cases had been taken be1- for6 a military commission and life taken. Cah it be that an American citizen is not entitled to all the rights that belong' toaBritish subject? Can is be that, With us, Executive power at times casts into theshadeaud renders: all other power subordinate? An American statesman, with a world-wide reputa* tion, long since gave an answer to theseinquiries. Iri a debate in the Senate ofthe United States, in which he assailed what he deemed an unwarranted assump tion of Executivepawer, hesaid, "the first object ofa freepeopleis the preservation of tbeir liberties, and liberty is only to be maintained by constitutional re straints and just divisions of political power." It does not trust the amiable weaknesses of human nature, rind therefore wilh not permit power to overstep its prescribed limits, though benevolence, good intent and patriotic intent'- s-ion— a .jurisdiction placed upon Executive authority alone. Bub it has been urged, also, that martial law Warrants such a Commission and that suchfjlaw pre vails here. The doctrine is believed to be alike inde fensible and dangerous. It is not, however, necessary to inquire whether martial law, ft it did prevail* would maintain your-jurisdiction. as it does npt prevail. It has never been declared by any competent authority, 164 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. and the civil courts, we know, are in full and undis turbed exercise of all their functions. We learn, and tbe fact is doubtless true, that one of tbe parties, the very chief of tbe alleged conspiracy, has been indicted and is about to be tried before one of those Courts'. ' If this, the alleged head and front of the conspiracy, is to be. and can be so tried, upon- what'grouud of right', of fairness, or of policy, can the. parties who are charged to have been his mere instruments, be deprived of the same mode of trial? It may be said tnat, in acting under this commission, you arehut conforming to tfrom being independent, are ab solutely dependent on such power. To pass upon the latter it provides juries, as- not being likely to "par take of thewishes and .opinions of the Government." But if your function is only to act as aids to the Pre sident, to enable him to exercise bis function of pun ishment,, and, as he is under no 'obligation, by any law, to call for suohaid.be may try and punish upon bis own unassisted judgment, and without even the form pf a. trial. In conclusion then, gentlemen. I* submit that your responsibility, whatever that be, for error, In a proceeding like this, can find no protection in Pre sidential authority. Whatever it be. it grows out of the laws and.may through the laws be enforced. Isuggested in the outset of these remarks that tbat responsibility inonecontingencymay.be momentous. l#recurtoit agata, disclaiming as I did at first the wish or. hope that it would cause you to be wanting in a single parti cular of what you may believe lobeyour duty, but to obtain your best and most 'matured judgment. The wish and hope disclaimed' would be alike idle and dis- Jiourteous; and.I trustthe Commission will dome the ustice to believe that lam incapable of falling into eitber fault. i , , . Responsibility to personal danger can never alarm foldiers who have faced, and will ever be willing in heir country's defense to face death on the battle field. But there is a responsibility -that everygentle- man.be be. soldier or citizen,; will constantly bold be fore nim and make him- ponder, responsibility tothe Constitution and laws of his countiy and an intelligent ?mblic opinion, and prevent his doing anything know- ngly that can justly subject .him to the censure of either. I have-said that your responsibility is great. If the commission under which you act isvoidand confers no authority, whatever you do may involve the most serious personal liability. Cases have oc curred that prove this. It is sufficient to refer to one. Joseph Wall, at the time of the offense charged against bimwas committed, was Governor and Commander ofthe garrison of Goree, a dependency ot England, in Africa." The indictment was for the murder of Benj. Armstrong, and the trialwas had in January, 1802, be fore a special court, consisting ot Sir Archibald McDonald,, chief baron of the Exchequer; Lawrence, Ofthe King's Bench; andRooke,of tbeCommon,Pleas. The prosecution was conducted by Law, then Attorney General, afterwards Lord Ellenborough. The crime was committed in 1782, and under a military order of the accused and the sentence of regimental court- martial. The defense relied upon was that at the time the garrison was in a state of mutiny, and that the deceased took a prominent part In it. That because of tbe mutiny the order for the court-martial was made, and that the punishment which was indicted, and said to have caused the death, was under its sentence. The offense was purely, a military one, and belonged to the Jurisdiction of a military court, if the facts relied upon by the accused were true, and its judgment constituted a valid defense. The court, however, charged the jury that If they found that there was no mutiny to justify such acourt- nitartial, or its sentence, they- were void and fur nish no defense whatever. The jury so finding, found the accused guilty, and be was BPon after executed. (28 St„ Tr. 51-178). The application of the principle of this case to the question I have confiideredMs obvious. In that instance, want of Jurisdiction in the court- martial was held toi be fatal to its 'judgment a& a de fense for the death that ensued under it. In this, if the Commission has no jurisdiction, its judgment, for the s.ame reason, will be of no avail, either toJudees, Secretary of War, or President, if either shall be called to a responsibility ior. what may be doneunder it. Again, upon the point of jurisdiction Ibeg leave to add tbat the opinion I have endeavoredto maintain is ,be- lieved to be the alriaost unanimous opinion of the pro.- fession. and certainly, is of every Judgp or court ,wh£ has expressed any. ' ' ' In Maryland, Wbere such commission! have been andarelield.'tne'Judgeofthe.Oriminal Court Qf, Bal timore reeeritlybiade it a matter of special charge to the grand jury. Judge Bond told them;—"Xt has come to my knowledge that here; where the United States Court, presided oyer by Chief Justice Chase, has , al- waysbeen unimpeded; aqd where the Marshal of the U rilted States, appointed by Ihp .President, selects lh$ jurors, irresponsible and unlawful militarycpmmis- sioris atteriapt to exercise criminal jurisdiction over cU tizens of this State, not in the'military or naval service of the United States, nor in the militia, who arp charged wir-h offenses either not known to the law, or with crimes for which the mode Of trial and punish ment are provided by statute in the courts of the land. That it ii not done by the1 paramount authority of the United States, your attention is directed to Article V of theConstitutionpf the "United states, which says:— ""No person shall be held to answer for. a capital or otherwisp'infamous crime unless on a presentment or Indiritriaentof a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in ac tual service iri time of war or public danger. Such Sersons, exercising such unlawful jurisdiction, are liab le to indictment bv'you as well as responsible in civil actions to tbe parties." In New York, Judge Peck- man.of the Supreme Court of that State, and speak ing for tbe whole bench, charged their Grand Jury as fojlows:— - ¦ ¦•'TheConstitutioriof the United States, Article 5, of the amendments, declares tbat 'no person shall beheld to-apswer for !a capital or' otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment pr indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service, in time of war oi public danger.' "Article 6 declares that in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy tbe right to a speedy and pub* licirial." "Article 3, Section 2, declares that 'the trial of aU crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury,' &c. ' "These' provisions were made for occasions of greai excitement, no matter froria. what cause, when passion rather than reason inight prevail. "In ordinary times there would be no occasion fbr such guards, as there would be no disposition to depart from tbe usual and established modes of trial. . "A great crime has lately been committed, that has shockedtthe civilized world. Every right-minded man desires the punishment oftbe criminals; but'he desires that punlshment'to be administered according to law, and throngh the judicial tribunals of the country. No star-chamber court, no 'sec^t inquisition in thisnihet- teentn century, can ever be made acceptable to tha American mind." "If nbrie but the guilty could be accused, then no trial could he necessary; execution should lollow accusa tion. ' ' "It is almost as necessary that tbe public should have Undpubtedfaith in the'purity of criminal justice], as it is that justice should iri fact be administered with Integrity. "Grayedoubts.'to sayAthe least, exist in the minds of intelligent haen as to thp constitutional right of the recent military commissions at Washington to sit in judgment upon the persons ndW on trial lor their lives before that tribunal. Thoughtful men feel "aggrieved that such a commission should be established in this free country when the war is over, and when the com> mon law courts are open and accessible to administer justice according to laW, without fear or favor. "What rempdy exists? None whatever, except through the power ofpubllc sentiment. "As citizens of tbls'ffee country, having an interest In its prospei Sty and good name, we may, as I desire to do, in all courtesy and kindness, and with all proper respect, express our disapprobation of this course in bur rulersat Washington.' "Theunahimity with which the leading press of our land has condemned this mode of trial ought to be gratifying to every patriot. "Every citizen is interested in the preservation, in theirpurity, ofthe institutions of bis country, and you, gentlemen, may make sucb presentment on this sub ject, ifany. as your judgment may dictate." The reputation of both of these judges is well and favorably known, and their authority entitled to tha greatest deference. Even in France, during the Consulship of Napoleon: the institution ofamUJtaryc'ommission for tbe trial ofthe prisoner, Due d'tEnghien, for an alleged conspi racy against his life, was, to the irreparable injury of his reputation, ordered by Napoleon- The trial was had, and the Prince at once' convicted find executed. Itbrought upon Napoleon the condemnation ofthe World, and is one of tpe blackest spots in hiscbaracter. The case ofthe Duke, says the eminent historian ot TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON; 165 was a deplorable consequence of violating the ordi nary powers of justice." And further adds:— "To de fend social order by Conforming to the strict rules and powers of justice, without allowing: any feeling of re venge to operate, is the great lesson to be drawn from these tragical events." (Vol.4, Thiers' History, &c., pp. 318. 322). Upon the whole, then, 1 think I shall not be con sidered obtrusive if I again invoke tbe court to weigh Weil all tbat I have thought it my duty to argue upon them. I feel the duty tb be upon me as a citizen sworn to do all that I can to preserve the Constitution and the principles on which it rests. As counsel of one of the parties, I should esteem myself dishonored if I at tempted to rescue my client from a proper trial tbr the offense charged against her by denying the jurisdic tion of the Commissionupon grounds that I did not conscientiously believe to be sound; and in what I have done I have not more had in view the defense of Mrs. Surratt than of tbe Constitution and tbe laws. In nty view in this respect ber cause is the cause of every citizen; and let it not be supposed that I amseekingto secure impunity to any who may have been guilty of the horrid crimes of the night of the 14th of April. Over tbese the civil courts of this District have ample jurisdiction and will faithfully exercise it it the cases are remitted to them, and, if guilt is legally esta blished, will surely award the punishment known to the laws. God forbid that SOch crimes should go un punished.' ' In tbe black catalogue of offenses, these will forever be esteemed tbe darkest and deepest ever committed by sinning man. And, in common with the civilized world, do I wish that every legal punishment may be legally inflicted upon all Who participated in them. A word more, gentlemen, andthankingyouloryour kind attention, I shall have done. As you have discovered, Ihave not remarked on tbe evidence in the case of Mrs. Surratt, nor is it my purpose. But it is proper that I refer to her case in particular for a single mo ment. Tbat a woman, well educated, and, as iaras we can judge from all her past life, as we have it in evi-. denCe, a devout Christian, ever kind, affectionate, and Pharitable, with no motive disclosed to us that could have caused a total change in' her very nature, could have participated in the crimes in question it is almost Impossible to believe. Such a belief can only be forced upon areasonable unsuspecting, unprejudiced mind by direct and un contradicted evidence, coming from pure and perfectly- unsuspected sources. Have we these? Istbeevidence uncontradicted. Are tbe two witnesses, Weichman aud Lloyd, pure and unsuspected. Ofthe particulars of their evidence I say nothing. They will be brought before you by my associates. But this conclusion in regard to those witnesses must bave in themmdsof the court, and is certainly strongly impressed upon my own, that if the facts which they themselves state as to their connection and intimacy witb Booth and Payne are true, their knowledge of tbepurpose to com mit the crimes and theirparticipation in them, ismuch more satisfactorily established than the alleged know ledge and participation ot Mrs. Surratt. As far, gen tlemen, as I am concerned, her case is now in your hands. BEVEBDY JOHNSON. June 16, 1865. As associate counsel for Mrs. Mary E. Surratt, we concur in the above. FBEDEBICK A. AIKEN, 1 ' JOHN W. CLAMPITT. Mr. F. Stone's Argument. P. Stone, Esq., counsel for Harold, being necessarily absent, the argument prepared by him was read by Mr. James J. Murphy, one of the official reporters of the Court. It commences by saying that at the earn est request of the widowed mother and estimable sis ters of the accused he had conserited to act as counsel.- After denying the jurisdiction of thisCourt the counsel Slays the charge in ihis case-consists of several distinct and separate offenses embodied in one charge. The parties accused are charged with a conspiracy in aid of the Bebellion, with murder, with assault with in- - tent to kill, and with lying in wait/ It is extremely doubtful, from the language of -the charge and thespe- cification. nuder which ofthe following crimes the ac cused, Harold, is arraigned and now on his trial, viz.: • First. Whether he is on trial for the crime of con spiracy to overthrow th£ Government of the United- States, or punishable by tbe Act of the Congress ofthe , United States, passed the 31st of July, 1861; or,' Second, whether he : is On his trial for 'giving aid and comfort to the Bebellion as punishable by the Act' of Congress passed the 15th of July, 1862; or, third, whether he is on trial for aiding or abetting the mur- ¦ der of Abraham Lincoln, President of theUnitedStates. His counsel well understands thelegal definition ofthe crimes above mentioned; but does not understand tbat either to the common law or to the laws of war is known any one offense composed of the three crimes mentioned in tbe charge. He knows of no one crime ofa conspiracy to murderand an actual murder, all in aid of the Bebellion, distinct and separate irom tbe well-known and defined crimes of murder, of conspi racy in aid of tbe Bebellion as defined by the Act of Congress. It is extremely doubtful from the language of this charge, whether the murder of the President of tne, United States is not referred to as to the mere meaijs by-which the conspirators gave aid and comfort to the Bebellion; whether it was not merely the overt act by which the crime of aiding the Bebellion was completed. First. As to the crime of conspiracy, the counseK after reViewftig the' testimony for the Government. says:— These facts would probably convict fifty people, but they do not give either separately or collectively the slightest evidence that this boy, Harold, ever con spired with Booth and others in aid of the Bebellion and ior the overthrow of theGoveniment of the Unite* States; They show nothing that might not have go curred to any one perfectly innocent. The term ^confidential communication" is the wit* ness' (Weichman's) own construction. Henaeantonly- to say that the three were talking together that alter leaving the theatre, where they had been, theystopped arid Wentinto a restaurant, and that he lelt them there* talking together near a store. Somuch Ior the conspi* racy.. Of the fact that this boy Harold wasanaideB and abettor in the escape of Booth there is no rational or reasonable doubt. He was clearly guilty of than crime, and must abideby its consequences;, but the ac cused; by his counsel, altogether denies that' be was guilty of the murder of Abraham Lincoln, or that he- aided or abetted in such murder, as set iorth in tha specification and charge; but though Booth exercised unlimited control over this miserable boy, body and", soulj he lOund' him unfit for deeds of blood, and- vio lence. He was cowardly; be was too weak and trifling, but Btill be could be made useful. ,; He -knew some ofthe roads through lower Maryland and Booth persuaded bim to act as a* guide, postboy and companion. This accounts for their companion-. ship. There was one pieceof evidence introduced by the Government that should be weighed by the iCom-i mission. It is the declaration of Booth made at the, time of his capture. "I declare before my. Maker this* man is- innocent." Booth knew well enough atthe1 time he made that declaration that bis* hours, if not his minutes, were numbered. There is no evidence tbat Harold procured, counseled, commanded or abetted Booth to assassinate the President of the Unite* States. The feeble aid that he could render to any enterprise was rendered in accompanying and aiding; Booth in bis flight, and nobbing beyond. That itself is- a grave crime and it carries with it appropriate pun ishment. ¦ , - j: , • The counsel concludes the defensewitha quotation from "Burnett on Military Law and Co urts- martial,' '. where the punishment for particular offenses are not fixed by law, but left discretionary with the Courts; Tbe above mandate of the. Constitution must* be di rectly kept in view, and the benign influence oi a man date froria a still higher law ought not tobe ignored, and that justice should be tempered witb mercy. Tbe elaborate argument, of which the above is a mere notice, is signed by F. Stone, counsel for.D. C. Harold; Mr. Cox next offered his argument in behalf of Ax-31 nold and O'Laughlin. Me*. .Cox's Argument. Hesaid that fpr. himself, execrating as he did the, odious crime wrought upon the Chief Magistrate ofthe nation, he would not have been willing to connect bis name witb this defense until he lelt assured that the accused was merely the victim of compromising ap pearances, and was wholly innocent of the great offense; The evidence, he contended, showed that: even if tbese two accused were even beguiled for a\ moment to listen to the suggestions of , this restless' schemer, Booth, yet thereiis no blood on their hands, and tUey are wholly guiltless of al 1 previous knowledge. of and participation in that "arch demon of malice'^ wbicbpluugedthenation into mourning. Both the accused and their counsel bave in this trial- labored under disadvantages not incident to the civil- courts and courts-martial. The accused receives not only a copy ofthe charge or indictment in time to pre-: pare his defense, but also a list of the witnesses with whom hejs to be confronted; and in the civil courts iu Is usual for tbe prosecution to state in advance thev general nature ot the charge he expects to establish and tbe general scope of the evidence he expects bar adduce. " - The crime was laid at Washington. -TJiepurlieuaoE Montreal and Toronto had been searched; the city ox New York 'was examined; the sea had been encom passed, and Western waters and yellow fever hospitals* ¦'- had been visited, and this eccentric career hadtermi* • nated in a New York wood. (Laughter.) , ; In this case the accused were aroused from thel» 1 slumbers on the night belore-their arraignment, and * .for the first timepresented with a copy ol the charge., For the most part they were unable to procure counsel until the trial1 had commenced; .and when counsel, were admitted they came to the discharge .of their du ties in utter ignorance of the, whole Paso which they were to combat, except as they could gather from the general language ofthe charge, as well as for the most part whoily unacquainted with the prisoners and then: antecedents; and the. consequence is that the earlier witnesses lor the Government were allowed to depart with little or no cross-examination, which subsequent TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON, events showed was of vital importance to elicit the truth and reduce their vagaries of statements to more , of accuracv ; and he would add that this testimony has consisted of statements of, informer s and accomplices, aly/ays suspicious, brought from remote places, whose antecedents arid character it is impossible for the prisoners to trace, tie was constrained further tp notice the manner in which tile trial has been conducted. The accused were arraigned upon a single charge. It described one offense or.sonae kind, but however specific in form it seems to have been intended/to fit every conceivable form of prime which the wickedness of men can devise. The online is located at Washington, yet we have been car ried to the purlieus of Toronto apd Montreal, have Skirted tbeborders of New York and Vermont, touch ing atOgdehsburg arid St. Albans, haye passed down the St. Lawrence, and out to sea, inspected our ocean shipping, have visited the fever hospitals ofthe British. isles, and have returned to the prison pen of Ander sonville, and seen the. camp at Belle Isle, and the his-> torical Libby, and penetrated the secret councils of Bichmond,- nave passed thence to the hospitals of the West, and ascended the Mississippi, and at, length terminated this eccentric career in the woods ot New York. Under a charge against the prisoners of conspiring to kill tbe President and others, in Wash ington, Jefferson Davis and his associates have heen tried, and in the judgment of many, convicted of starv ing, poisoning, arson, and other crimes too numerous, to mention. He had apprehended that thecouwsejifor tjrp accused would appear In a false position by tpeir ap7j parent acquiescence in. this wide range of inquiry, andj therefore, felt it due to himself, at least, to explain. For bis part, he felt no interest whatever in insisting on the exposure of the misdeeds of the Bebel authori- ties and agents. His only .concern, has been tp show that his clients had nothing to, do with the con spiracy set lortb in the charge. To the, best of his ability be had scrutinized the evidence of that conspiracy so far as necessary to their- defense. With regard to other matters foreign to this issue, be had to say, in tbe first place, the charge was artiully. framed with a view to admit them in evidence.: -It imputes that the accused consoired- with Jefferson Davis, and others, to kill and murder the President, Mr. Cox, in bis analysis of the primes charged, said that below tbe grade of treason crimes arei ranged under two general heads, viz., felonies and misde meanors, and proceeded to deal with the question of a conspiracy to commit a felony and then with a oonspi-r racy to commtt treason, and thence proceeded to take up the question of unexecuted conspiracy and the case of a party involved in a conspiracy who shall with draw from it^ contending that lie ia not responsible for any act done by the others in prosecution of the obr Jects ofthe conspiracy. Afterwards these and other points in this connection were presented by Mr. Cox* with a large array ot-cita- tioris 'ftpom legal authorities. The question how far tribunals sitting by virtue of martial law, can depart from the: established law of the land, In Its distinction between crime and its scale of punishments, was dealt with at considerable length. Mr. Cox then proceeded to examine the evidence so far as was, material to hia. case, and claimed in b's analysis of proof that no-active design against the life Ofthe President was on foot be tween January and the early part ,of April, and lurther, . from the evidence ofthe Government,, that during that; interval. Booth was, contriving an entirely diherenljj project, the capture ofthe President anfrothers. f It -further appeared thatthe project was abandoned, and tbat the abandonment is fixed by facts referred to by Booth) to wit-rthe defection of some of the parties, the sale'Of horses, &e; and that the date is ascertained, to have been about the middle pf March. Now.it is clear that if any connection is Shown between Boptb on one hand, and O'Laughlin and Arnold on theother, it existed only during the period when the apsurd pro ject of capture was agitated^ and terminated with. that. Their fitful. stay in Washington was only be tween February i;0 and March 18. By Arnold's con-. fesslon it would appear that if'.he is not mistaken, GXaugblin attended one meeting- about the middle of- March, to consider the plan of, capture; but so imma-. te'riai was the plan, and so slight his connection with. it, that he did not even knriw the namps ot the others at th,e meetings— two. in number— besides Booth, Sur-. ratt and Atzeroth. At tbat meeting the scheme fell through, and he and O'Laughlin immediately afterwards left for Baltimore. Booth told him rie might sell the arms he had given him ; and iniact it ia prayed that he gave part of them; away shortly after this. Hisconfessiori as to O'Laugh lin proves nothing but, his presence at this singleinpet-* ing. This was the beginning and end off their- connection: with Booth in .any scheme whatever, of a political character, and iu this it is evi dent that- be was the , arch contriver and they the dupes; and' when they bad escaped his influ ence, although he still evidently clung to his design, and telegraphed, and wrote, and, called to, see them it is eyident that they refused to heed the voice ol the. charmer, "charm he never so wisely." From O'Laughlin he received no response at all; from Ar nold only the letber offered in. evidence. There are, expressions in the letter which look to a continued, renewal of their relations inthe future, but they^ere employed to parry bis importunities ior the present* Certainly all connection ceased from that time. If, therefore, any conspiracy at all be proved by the, utmost latitude of evidence. against these two accused, it was amereunenacted, stillborn scheme, scarce con-* ceived before it was abandoned; of a nature wholly different from the offense described in this charge, the proof of which does not sustain thiseharge, aud oiWhiph theaccused could not be convicted upon this trial. For this Court is bound by the rules of evidence whteh pre-. vails in others; and one o f the most important is that the proof musteorrespond with Use charge of indict ment, and show. the same offense, or the accused is en-| titled to acquittal; and therp is no evidence which con nects these two accused with that dreadful conspiracy wnieh forms the subject of this charge. 1 here is noth ing to show that during their brief intercourse with Booth, at Washington, that, neiarious design was agi-- tated at all;- certainly none that.it was ever disclosed to them. And if such conspiracy had any existence it was in a state _q£ slumbered suspense, awaiting t.hatj sanction without which it had no motive., end, aim or life.. ¦-- . v Mr, Cox contended that the following conclusions, were" established, viz :— - < First. That the,aQCUsedi.Sam.uel Arnold and Michael O'Laughlin, had no part whatever in the execution of the conspiracy set forth in thisxhargeand'its specifi cations. Second. That if! they were implicated in such conspiT racy, they withdrew lrom and abandoned it, while ye$ wholly unexecuted and resting merely in intention* and are not responsible far any of tbeacis subsequently done in pursuanceof it. Third,. That theiie is/no legal and competent evidence Implicating O'Laughlm in. any conspiracy whatever, and implicating either O'Laughlin or Arnold in the conspiracy charged. . Fourth. That if there Is any evidence against then} of any conspiracy, It is, of pne whpily different from. that set forth, in thecharge and specification, and upon these they must be, wholly acquitted* He therefore claimed for them, an absolute and unr qualified acquittal. That the.acpused were wrong in ever joining the Bebellion against their Government no one will deny. But it would be to insult themtelli-. genceot this Court to waste time in showing that this ourt are not sitting in judgment on~all the errors in the lives of these accused, but to decide the single quesr tion, whether they are guilty of conspiring to kill and murder the president, , Vice President, Secretary of State and the General in command of the armies oi the UnitedSt&tes, and of the acts charged against thena severally in pursuance of said conspiracy. The Court adjourned till to-morrow aiternoon, when it is expected arguments in tbe case of Spangler and others will be read. , . . (Early inthe day Mrs. Surratt.was compelled to be talcen. from tbe Court-room, owing to severe sick* TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS: AT WASHINGTON. 167 Washington, June 20.— Tbe Court met at 2 o'clock, When Mr. Ewing read bis argument in iavor.of tbe accused, Edward Spangler, reviewing at length all the testimony bearing upon tbe particular case filed. Spangler, it had been shown, seemed to. have a great admiration lor Booth, who, excelled in all the manly . sports, and witnesses had also testified that Spangler's character was that ofa peaceful, good-natured, kind and harmless man. Spangler was, the drudge for Booth, I sometimes taking care and, feeding- the latter's horse. I Booth, out of courtesy, had access tothe theatre wheri- \ ever it was open. In calling attention to the relations between Spangler and Booth, Mr. Ewing desired to mark the fact that in all the testimony as to the lat ter's meetings, associations and acts done and things said, there was not the slightest indication tnat Spang ler ever met Booth except in the theatre, and there was nothing to show that Spangler had any intima tion of Booth's purpose, or even Innocently helped him. to effect it. It appeared from the testimony for the prosecution tbat there were lound in Spangler's carpet-bag a rope eighty-one feet long, some letter paper and a shirt collar. It was shown that just such ropes, were used at the theatre for hoisting borders to scenes.haulingup timber to the top dressing, rooms, etc. This rope had been produced by the Government as proof against Spangler, but from the testimony of persons employed in the theatre it appeared that Spangler stole the rope for a crab-line. Inthe devilish scheme of Booth this rope certainly was not to be used as a lariat or a baiter. If it was intended for such a purpose itjwould. have been kept at tb e theatre, and not at bis boarding bouse £3 a carDet-bag. Mr. Ewing was. not bound to show what Spangler was going to ddfrwith tbe shirt collar and letter paper. The counsel next examined the testimony in relation to the box occupied by the late President, refuting by a reference to tne evidence things whicb had been said concerning Spangler in that connection. Tbe acts of preparation lor tbe assassination were performed by Booth himself, when he had previously occupied the same box. If Booth had a confederate in Spangler, Ihe boring of the hole in the door and the door brace would have been made witb Spangler's carpenter tools. The hole had first been bored witb a gimlet and then enlarged with a penknife; tbese acts of prepara tion were mere drudgery, which Spangler wouldbave been called upon to do it be had been in conspiracy with Booth. That Booth did both and Spangler neither, showed that Spangler wad not in the plot when' tbe preparations were made. Mr. Ewing ailuded to the testimony that Booth came to the*' bacK of the theatre at nine o'clock on the night of thelithof April, and said, "Ned, you help me all you can? to wniCh Spangler is represented as answering,. "Oh, yes!" , This testimony was contradicted by the responsible Utility man and other witnesses. But grant < that Spangler did make the reply, it must bave been in a loud cone to be beard by the witness. As t here was no previous testimony, showing the slightest act of ar rangement of conspiracy on the part of Spangler/ the replv of Spangler should be treated as nothing but .the (reply of a drudge to bis superior and not knowing* the latent of tbe question. It Spangler was to bave inTlped Booth, be wouldbave got a substitute to shove the scenes, and alter the pistol shot to bave opened the floor lor tbe escape of tbe assassin. If Spangler had been in league with Booth, -would be, as has been testi fied bave stood motionless and leave Booth to the hazard of flight unaided? And would Spangler him self bave run for water after he heard tbat somebody had been shot? If Booth made use of that language to -Spangler and.Spanglerthus replied, the latter couLd bave known nothing of a criminal purpose. IfSpang- ler had any speeific part to play, it was to holaVBooth's harse. He failed to, do that and remained on the stage. ¦She evidence did not show that he was a party to the Crime.. Booth came to the house witb his horse but Once that night, and thus Booth could have bad no previous opportunity to communicate witb him, that night. Wefchman's testimony; Is unsupported by the other evidence and is inconsistent with it. Tne fact that Booth knocked the horse holder down on emerg ing from the theatre shows tbat Booth, who naturally supposed it was Spangler he was thus striking, had no complicity witb Spangler. Booth thought it was Bpanglef, and not "Peanuts," who held his horse, foi Booth-had just rushed, out from the glare of gaslight Into tbe darkness. Another! item was produced! to show tbat Spangler knew of Booth's purposes. SeT geant Bye testified as to seeing a roughly dressed man m front of the theatre. Jwith wbomTBooth whispered before entering tbe theature and previous to the assasi- riation of the President. This man, it was said, had a black moustache, but it had been proven tbat Spangler on that night wore no such moustache. IV he had been in trontof the theatre with a black moustache, red as his hair is the visitors to the theatre would have had their attention drawn to bis grotesque appearance. Spangler could not have been absent from the sta e .frpm twenty-five tp thirty minutes past nine to ten minutes past ten without being inissed, for it was his business to shove the scenes'. He could not have beeo absent three Quarters ol, arbour without attracting at tention- and .ail alibi was clearly proved he was not only not in front of the theatre, but, at ball-past' nine o'clock, was opposite the dopr at which the murderer escaped, and least able to help the villian's flight Spangler was on the stage tor an hour up to the time of the assassination. Having presented ali theevir dence bearing upon the acts done and words spoken by Spangler up to that tiipei Mr. Ewing proceeded to discuss his conduct untiil his arrest, on the 17th. of April, at his boarding-house, where he had lived for five or six ^months, during thethr^e days and nights interverilng between tbe assassination and the arrest nothing was done by Spangler which did not indicate a conscious sense of innocence- He felt confident in the assertion that Booth had no ac? complice.' He did not need ariy. Booth had pi lyedai that thpatre, and by courtesy had, free admittance! therefore he had made his own preparations. The leap from the bqx to the stage was one whicb might have been made by any man with safety. Had nofr his spur caugijt in the flag Booth wouldbave made the leap Witb ease. The counsel was confident that Booth needed no help, butsomeorieto bold bis'horse, wbicb u Peanut John* ' did ¦ and he" opeued and shut the doo» for himself. It appeared from the testimony ot Mr Hess, the riaanager ofa rival theatre, that Booth in? quired particularly of bn\m whether Grover's theatre was to be Illuminated, and whether thePresident wag invited on the occasipn. Erom the testimony as to Booth's inquiries it seems clear that the assassination of the President would have been attempted at Gro ver's theatre had the President attended that bouse on the night of the illuriaipatipn. Mr.E^ing examined at length other parts of the t'estiiriony, and concluded by saying he could see ia the evidence no such suspicion As would induce a grand jury to present Spangler" for trial, and he ber lieved a candid review of the entire subject would leave in the minds of but very lew a reasonable doubt of his innocence. Colonel Doster stated that he would be prepared to read the argument for Payne to-morrow. General Howe said that the Court has already ex tended thp time for' the arguments. If they were all not present to-morrow let the remainder be filed. With these delays tbey might not get through till autumn. > Generel Aiken said he was, willing to grant all the time the counsel asked to prepare their arguments oa subjects of this importance. Garieral Hunter said the testimony was very voh> nainous. Mr. Ewing remarked the labor of preparation was greater than was supposed; it would be out of his povypr to prepare Dr., Mudd's defense beiore Friday, as there wer6 two hundred and fifty pages of evi"0 ence in tbat case. Thp Court yoted to grant an extension of time for the preparation of the remaining- arguments, and then adjourned till noon to-mprrow- Washington, June 91.— Court being calledto order Mr. Doster, counsel for Payne and Atzeroth- proceeded tp read his argument in behalf of Payne. There are tnree things; he said, in the case c-V the prisoner Payne*, which are admitted heyond cavil or dispute:— 1st. That he is the person' who attempted to take t^e life of the' Secretary pf State. 2d. That he is not within tbe medical definition of inr sanity." - 3d. That be believed what he was doing ' was righ* arid justifiable. The questions as to his identity and sanity are there fore-settled, and among the things of tbe past, and the sole remaining question is, " How far shall his con vie1- tions serve to mitigate his punishment ?" He used th*^ word punishment deliberately, and witb the conscious ness tbat in so doing be admitted tbat if the prisoner is a responsible being, he ought to be punished, and he said It becadsp he could not allow his'dtitiefi as counsel to interfere with his convictions as a man so far as to make him blind to the worth of the life of a distinguished citizen, and to the awful consequences of an attempt to take it away. Ir, in deed, such an attempt should be allowed to go without rebuke, then it seemed to b'iin theoffice is but a peril ous exposure to violence, the highest coinpensatlon, for public servfee is' the distinction which follows assassination, and then our' public servants are but pitiable and defenseless offerings to; sedition; and surely if any public servant deserved to be excepted froria that fate it was the iUustfibus and sagacious statesman who, duringa long life df arduous service, has steadfastly checked all manner -of faction and public discontent; who, in the darkest days of disr cord; has prophesied the triumph of concord, arid who at' all times has been more ready to apply antidotes than the knife to the nation's wpunds. That we may accurately apd as fully -SB the occasion demands un- 138 TRIAL OF THE; ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. derstand tbe convictions of the prisoner, the counsel proceeds to-give a sketch of his lite, the customs under which be was reared, and the education which he re ceived. Lewis Payne Powell is* the son of "Rev. George C Powell, a Baptist minister, at present supposed to 13ve at Live Oak Station, on the railroad between Jackson ville and Tallahassee, iri the State 'of Florida, and was born in Alabama, inthe year 1845. Besides himself bis ¦father had six daughters and two sons. 'He lived for some time in Worth arid Stewartcourities, Georgia.and in 1859 moved to Florida. At thebreakihgoutof trhe war, but four years ago. the prisoner was a lad of six teen engaged in superintending bis father's plantation and a number of slaves. Wemaysafely pnesumethat, occupied in the Inno cent pursuits of country life, he daily heard the pre cepts of the Gospel from bis father, and that in the society of his sisters the hardy lite of a planter was Softened by the charrias of a refined and religious cir cle, and that in the natural course of events he would be to-day as he was theri; a farmer and an honest man. But In 18L?1 war broke orit— war, tbe scourge1 and pestle lence of the race. The signal, which spread like a fire, was notlong in'reaching XiveOak Station. His two brothers enlisted-, and Lewis, though but sixteen, enlisted in Captain Stuart's Company, in tbe Second Florida Infantry, commanded by Colonel Ward; and was ordered to Richmond. Mr. Doster proceeded to consider what, in the eyes of this Florida boy, was the meaning of the war, and what tbe thoughts tbat drove him from a pleasanl^home'to the field of arms. • The Counsel pictured in vivid language, the auspices onder which Powell was trained In a slave 'cona mu ni ty, where it was thecustorii to defend thfe institution of slavery iB meeting-houses, at political gatherings, and in family prayers, where it was1 the practice to whip and burn men who preached against the institu tion, and to hunt fugitives with bloodhounds, and also those who helped them to' freedom. Iri the eyes of the lad the war meant to abolish this custom and up heave society from its foundations: His Iriheritance was to be dissipated, his vassals equal, his laws in vaded, his religion confounded, his politics a heresy. For this'the'lad wasgoin£ to fight; in the defense of a social system. He Was going to fight in behalf of the traditional prePept ofthe State— to defend State rights. JFor a third- reason, he was going to fight to show that lie was a better man than the Northerners, under the deep conviction prevailing in his1 sectiriri, that' their blood and breeding was ' better tban that of North erners. The fourth' feasori was to repel invasion. These were his incentives. But he had been Schooled arid trained ttf war ; by the bowie-kniie and pistol code of honor prevalent there. '•¦¦ The coufasel asks whether in the wide world there is another school In whicb the prisoner could so well have been trained for assassination as in this slaye au tocracy-?- -Mr.' Doster '.proceeds to argue that iri this prisoner is to be found the legitimate moral • offspring «>f slavery, State Bights,' chivalry and delusion, and then goes on to inquire if we, as the American people, are not responsible for the wicked school iri '^hich be was educated, and if we will determine to destroy mm because he , learned but as we instructed. ' But there-is? another' 'school before him; the school .erf war at Richmond: iHis-. regiment joined the Army .Of General Lee, and was joined to A. P. Hill's Corps: With it 'he "passed through the-Peninsula campaign And the battle's of ehainbellorsvilie and' Antietaria. Here he heard that his two brothers bad been killed atthe battle of Mur frees bo ro'. Finally, on the 3d of July, 1863, In thecharge upon the Federal centre at Gettysburg,. he was wounded, tatoenprisoqer, and de tailed as a nurse in a Pennsylvania Hospital, The de moralizing, effect of- his two years*',campaigning as a private in the army, whicb he entered as aboy of six teen, is shown. „ ,, He is one of that army who made baskets and cups out of the bones of Unipn soldiers, who starved their prisoners, who, plundered the dead, who slew men after surrender. and.who werecomriaanded by officers -yrbo had violated their, oathg to the, United States,; an army that believed any means justifiable that helped the cause of Southern independence; and, finally, an army that held the person ,pnd Cabinet of the Presi dent of the TJuitep States hi holy execration. I This is the horrible demoralization of civil war, aud cm those responsible for this war, should rest the re sponsibility of the acts of this plastic boy, who came into the world in the year of .the annexation of Texas, has liyed but four administrations, and is younger than the last compromise with slavery. He is the moral product of the .war, and belongs to those who first begun it. How does he differ from the other Rebel BC/ldiers? " .,' The best Rebel soldiers have fired at Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Seward; have approached the city by stealth from Baltimore, and aimed to destroy the Government by a sudden blow; so did he. The best Bebel soldiers have picked off high, officers ot ,ihe Government- Kearney, Stevens. Baker, WadsworLh, Lyon, Sedg wick; so didhe. What then, has he done that every Rebel soldier has npt tried to do? . . Only; this; he has ventured more, he has shown a higher courage and a better bate; a more ready sacri fice. He has aimed at the head of a Department in stead of the bead ofa Corps. To us the President ap peared as the savior of .a nation, lropv civil, -war, and Mr. Seward as the great pacificator, the savior frqm foreign war. But to this bPy, and five millions of his fellow countrymen, the one appeared as a usurper, invader and violator of laws, and destroyer of life, liberty and property. The other as an , adviser in op-. pressionanda slippery advocate of an irrepressible eon met. He differed from the Southern armysimplv because he surpassed it iri courage, and he differed from a patriot and martyr simply because he was mis taken in his duty. But there is a third school before him. From Gettys burg he was sent to' West's Buildings Hospital, Pratt street, Baltimore, and remained until October, 186% wbenr seeing no bopejafjejechange, he deserted witb a view to rejoin bis reglriaent. Not, being able to get through1 our lines, he joined a regiment of cavalry at Fauquier, aud retrained in that service until January 6„ 1865. On , that day, as we see by tha narrative of Mrs.,Grant,hp saved theliyes of two Union soldiers.- About the dame time he, like many other. Southern soldiers, began to despair of' the' Confede racy,' came, to ' Alexandria, sold' ' his horse, gave h^s name as Payne, took the. oath of allegiance as a re fugee from Fauquier, and went to Baltimore and tooB a room atthe house of Mrs. Branson, the lady he had met at Gettysburg! and xesolved to wait for the returh of peace. . Inctnjs third school; the Bebel cavalry ser vice, he received further damaging training, and amongst tbe people of Loudon and Fauquier, who had suffered most from the war, gained an added acri mony and bate -for those deemedtheir oppressors, Bu> there is a fourth school befbre him, the school of ne cessity, l ii , i . ,. ¦ Hewas in Baltimore without trade or profession; He was unused to manual labor, in perplexity about bis future, for thelittlelmoneyhegotfor his horse was fast going. Ha whiled-away the tiriae i#reading medi* cal works and broodibg in his chamber. ¦; While 'hi this condition, the fraeas occurred at his boarding house, by whicb be was arrested, brought before the Provost Marshal and ordered north of Philadelphia* Everywhere the sky is dark to him, Heis proscribed amongst Northern men as a ' Rebel.despised amongst Southern men in Baltimore as a recreant ¦ Southerner-. and a by-word among Southern men at home as a deserter. ¦ Penniless and friendless, the earth seenis tr*- reject him. and God and man lo be against bim. Ti. is the work of civil war; His1 education is now com* pletedi Slavery has taught him to1 wink at murdeiv The Southern army has taughthim-to practice and jus* tiiy naurder. Guerrilla warfare has taught him tolbve murder. ;Necessity- has taught him resolution to com* mit murder. He needs no further education; his lour terms are complete, and he graduates an assassin. And of this college we the reunited people of the United States have been tbe stern tutors, guidesand professors^ It needs now.anly that some oneshouldempLoy him* At the beginning/of the-war Powell pne night went' to the theatre at Bichmond; it was the first play thai Powell ever saw.jand he was spell-bound With- the ma* gical influence of the stage, but. was ¦ chiefly attracted by the voice and manner of 'one'ioftbe actors— J. WilkesBooth.' - - * i •¦-¦..¦., Although only, a private soldier, Powell considered himself the equal of any man, and, after the play was overrsought and gained an introduction to the actor, Never were two natures thrown together so different yet so wel£ calculated to rule the other and be- ruled. The soldier was tall, awkward* rough,;frank, ready, and hastened to impart his mvsterious plans. The plan was to got i Was .in^con.'tafce a ride Witb confederates on horseback to the Soldier's Home, cap ture the President arid deliver him to the Rebel authorities. Oa the evening o. the Uth of April, at- 8 O'clock. Booth told him the hour had sirucit, paced in his hands the knile, the revolver aud the bo.,us package ot medicine, and told him to do his duty, and gave him ahorse, wuh d, recti uns to meet bim at the Auacosta Bridge; and he went and did the deed. . Said Mr. Doster.— I bave uskid him why he did it. His only answer is, "because* I believed it my duty." Mr. Doster argued that Payne at the time be com mitted this deed had no will of his own, but had sur rendered his will completely to BooLh, under mat in fluence, that complete supremacy of one mind over anotuer. that has gone b/ various names amongst various nations, and which we call *' mesmerism." Booth was a person peculiarly giaed with this un accountable influence, and tne prisoner was lurtbe: held to Booth by the ties of gratitude, by bis oaih, by ties ot interest, and by ties of sympathy in a common cause. Hence the explanation wuy, when informed of Bootu's plans, .he did not in.orm ihe authorities and break away from Bootn. Mr. Doster drew a distinc tion between t ae hired assass.n who kills tor gold, and the ianatical assassin who deems It bis duty to offer Up his own iiie in exchange ior the life he believes to be a pub ic enemy, and contended tbat Payne was of the latter class. ' The erect bearing, the patience, the smiling self-pos session of the prisoner, were referred to as indi cating the political lanatic, a monomaniac .on the subject of his duty. He urged that tnis man wishes to die in order to gain the fullcrowuol m.r- tyrdom, and thereiore it wegratiiy him he will tri umph over us, but if we spare him we will triumph over him. If suffered to live, he will receive the worst punishment, obscurity, and the public will have no thing to admire. He has killed no man, and if be be put to death we shall bave the anomaly of the victim surviving the murderer, and, under tbe iaws.be can be punished only tor assault and battery, with intent to kill, aud thereiore imprisoned. Mr. Doster proceeded with other considerations why the prisoner's life should be saved, and before concluding spoke ot the many good qualities be had found in theprisoner by his inter course with him, his frank, manly bearing, his disin clination lor notoriety, and his indisposition to screen himself from punishment. His only prominent anxiety was lest. people should think bim a hired iLssassin or a brute, an aversion to being made a pub.ic Bpeccace o; , and a desire to be tried at the hands of his lellow citizens. After an hour's recess taken by the Court, Mr. Doster eni.red upon the argumen. oub.-hali of Atzeroth, com mencing by offering a statement by bis client as fol lows :— Tne prisoner, Atzeroth, submits the following state ment to the Court:— "lam one of a party who agreed to capturp the President of tbe Uuited States, or any memoer of the Cabinet, or General Grant, pr. Vice President Johnson. The first plot, to capture, haUled; the second, lo kill, I broke away from tne moment I heard of it. This is the way it came aborit. Ou iheevenirigof the Mth of April I met Booth and Payrie at 'the Herndon Hotel, in this city, at 8 o'clock; he (Bootrij said hebimselt would take charge oi Mr. Lincoln and General Grant, Payne should take Mr. Seward, aud I should t ke Mr. Johnson, i told him I wou.d not do it; that I had gone into the thing to cap ture, but tnat I was not going to kill. He told me I was a ioi.1. that I would be hung any bow, that it was death lor every man that backed out, and so we parted. £ wandered about the streets until about two o'clock in the morning, and then went to the Kim mell House, and lrom there I procured my pistol at Ueorge own, and went to my cousin's house, in Montgomery county, wnere I was arrested the 19th following. After I was arrested I told Provost Mar shal Weils and Provost Mnrshal McPhail the whole story:' I also told it to Captain Monroe, and Colonel Wells told me if I pointed out the way Bootn had gone I would be reprieved, and so I told him I thought he had. gone .own Charles county, in orderto cross the Potomac. The aims whicb were found in my loom at the Klrk- wood House and a black coat, do nPt belong tome. Oh the afterndou of tbe 14th of April Harold called to see me aud left tbe coat there, it is his coat-, and all in it belongs to him. as you can see by tbe handker chief marked with his initial and with the name of his Bister. Mrs Naylor. Now I will state how I passed the whole of the evening of the Mth of April. In tbe afternoon, about two o'clock, I went to tbe livery Stable on Eighth street, near D, and hired a dark bay mare, and rode into the country for pleasure, and on my return pother up at ISay'iOr's stable., The dark bay mare v/.± chlha.1 ke tat Naylor's befoiv. on or about the 3d ot April, belonged to BooLh, and, also, the saddle aud bridle, and I had charge of her lo sell her and I do not know wuat become o. ner ' At about six in the eveniug i went to Naylor's again and took out the mare, rode out for an hoar and re turned her to Kaylor's. It was then nearly e>frht ociock, audi tola nira to keep tne mare rendy atten olclock, morder lo return her to the man I hired her from. From there I went to tue-Hirndou House. Booth sent a message to Oyster Bay, wnere I was, say ing be wanted to see me. and I went. Booth wanted me to murder Mr. Johnson. I refused; Itnenwent to the Oyster Bay, on the Avenue, above Twelfth street, aud whiled away the lime until near ten. At ten I got the mare, and having taken a drink wi h the hosier, galloped about town and went to tne Kunmell House: jrom there I rode down to tbe Uepob, and returned with very hard riding up Pennsylvania avenue to Kelcher's. From Keicher's I went down to the Navy Yard to get a room with Wash. Briscoe. He had none, and by the time I got back to tbeKimemll House ty.was. near two. The man Thomas was a strangefe I met on the street. The next morning, as siated, I went to my cousin Kechler's in Montgomery county. GEORGE A. ATZEHOTH. Mr. Doster, proceeding with his argument, quoted the specification under whicn the prisoner Atzeroth is charged, as follows:— '•Andin further prosecution of said conspiracy and its traitorous and murderous desiens, the said ueorge A. Atzeroth did, on the night ol the 14th oi April, Aunq Domini 1865, and about the same hour of the night aforesaid, within the military departmenb and mili tary lines aloresaid, lie in wait fur Andrew Johnson, then Vice President oi tbe United StaLes aioresaid, with the intent un.awiully and maliciously to kill and murder the said Andrew Johnson. in support oi this specification the Government has submitted the testimony ot Weichman and Miss Sur ratt that be was frequently at Mrs. Surratt's, in com pany with Booth; of Greenwalcthathebad interviews witb Booth at the Kimmell House, and tbat he said outbe 1st of April, "Greenwalt. I #tm pretty near broke, though I have friends enough to give me as muph money as will keep me all my life. I am going away one of these days, but will return with as much, money as will keep me all my lifetime.'' - Of Marcus P. Norton, that he overheard him ju con versation with Booth, in which it was said, about the evening ofthe 3d of March, that "if the matter suc ceeded as well witb Johnson as it did with old Bu chanan, tbe party would be sold;" and also, "tbat the character of the witnesses would be such that nothing could be proved by them." Of Colonel Nevins, that hewas asked by the prisoner, between four and five ot the afternoon ofthe 12th of April, at the Kirkwood House, to point out Mr. Johnson while at dinner. Of John F. etcher, that on or about April 3d the prisoner owned a horse and saddle, which be after wards said was sold in Montgomery county, and which was afterwards tbund near Camp Bariug Hos pital on tlie night of the uth of April, and also tbat he l ot, a dark bay mare at Naylor's, out he evening oi the Mth, which be had brought there in the morning and rode her away at half-past six. Brought her back at eight returned again at ten, ordered bis mare, took a drink, said "'if this thing happens to-night you will hear of a present." and said of tbe mare, "she is good on a retreat." Tbat then he rode to tbe Kirkwood House, came out again, went along D Street and turned up Tenth. Of Thomas L. Gardner, that the same dark bay one- eyed horse found near Camp Barry was sold by his uncle to George Gardner. Of John Toffey, tbat the same horse was found at 12% A. M., Saturday, 15th of April, near Camp Barry. Of Wash. Briscoe, that on the night of the 14th of April, between 12 and 12\' o'clock, the prisoner got out of the cars near the Navy Yard and asked liim three times lo let him sleep in the store; that he was refused and said he would return to tbe Kimmell House. Of Greenwalt, that he came to the Kimmell House at 2 A, M. With a man named Tho mas and hesitated to register his nanaeand wentavvay inthe morning without paying bis bill. Of Lieut. Keim, that he stopped in tbe same room with the prisoner at the Kimmell House, and when he (witness) spokeof the' assa ^si nation Atzeroth said "It was an awful affair*)' and that on the Sunday beiore he saw a knife in bis possession, a large bowie knife in a sheath, and that be, Atzeroth, remarked, "If one fails I waut the other." Of Wm. CJendenin, tbat be iound a knife similar to the one seen by Keim, on F, between Eighth and Ninth streets, on tbe morning after the assassi nation. Of Robert Jones and Job n Lee, that Atzeroth took a room at the Kirkwood. No. 126, and that iu it, on the morning of the 15th, was found a coat contain ing a pistol loaded, and bowie knile. and handkerchief marked with the name of J. Wilkes Booth. Of Pro- vostMarshal McPhail, that Atzeroth confessed to him, that be threw his knife away near the Herndon House; tbat he pawned his pistol at Caldwell's store, in Georgetown, and borrowed ten dollars, and that the coat and arms at tbe Kirkwood belonged to Harold. 179 TRIAL OP THE! ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Of Sergeant GenimiU, that be dejiiea* having left Washington recently, or having anything to do with the assassi nation. Of Hezekiah Metts, tLatonSundayfcBcWragthemur- der Atzeroth said at his house, "If the- rhan had fol lowed General Grant who was to have followed mm.' be wouldhave been killed." To' negative1 tbis specifi cation the defence had submitted? the, testimony of Somerset Leamah that the prisoner said at Metts* bouse, when asked if Grant was killed, "ho, I dp Tbe fourth point or the ptosedUtidn 13 that Atzeroth lodged in the same house With the" Vice^ President;, and the relative situation of the rooms was favorable' to assassination. Trie room of the Vice^ President was one which rio one could help passing iri goirig doivn or nb.'aaid. room 126 was as1 remote from if as Possible, in" a different wing. It is evident that any Orie desirous of lying Iri waft for the Vice-President Would have taken a room on the same Hour, but the actual fact" IS better thaSa suppositions'. . Mr. Browning says the- vice President Was in bis room from 5 to 10. during which time the deed could bave been done. There Is no evidence that Atzeroth Was at the house during that time, except that of Fletcher, wbo says thap Atzeroth wept there and stayed five minutes'. What Was be doing there? He was taking a drink at the bar. If he tried to kill Mr. Johnson Why was it not shown? No orie was seen Ivingin wait; the lock bad not been tampered with; / the V'cte President was -undisturbed even by a knock / qu the door— and wby? Because Atzeroth recused to doit. Because he kept np' appearances but backed out. Becausp,.the instrument Which Was to bave as sassinated the1 Vice President was too conscientious, or afraid to do it. , The fifth pbintis, that on bis arrest he gave a false name, denied having left Washington recently, and Raid he", had nothing to do witb the assassination. For thelast statement be told the truth. Assassination and iriurder were things for which he Was riot by nature intended, and he had nothing to do With it; as for the false nariae, it appeared that Sergeant Gemnaill understood his name to be Atwood; knowing that ;he had been in colleague with others to capture thp Presi dent, be was afraid to confess his part, and then and there denied having recently left Washington. The sixth point is that he said to Fletcher, after ten on the 14th, "if this thing, happens tp-higbt'you Will beaT of a, present." And also In reference to the mare; "she is good on a retreat;" and tb Lieutenant' Keim, on the Sunday before, "If one fails I shall want the other." On the first .occasion, Atzeroth was about hW drunk, While the other remark was -mtktte 'after the parties had taken their cocktails, so th^teven if we pl-edit tn,fe drunken memories of the witnesses, we can not db more than credit it to pot valor, pointing to the possible desperate melee of an attempt to capture. There la-only one assumption that Will make every thing agree. Atzeroth backed out' He arMved herd; be liked tbetobriey, but did ribt like to be hung. Ha neyer heard or murder before that evening at eight o'clock, or he .w'orild lorig belbre* have hid himself. Wheri he did hear it b'ehad flrinliess enough to object. GdWata cob-jclince calriie to tils rescue. Bet Bootn TRIAL GP THE, ASSASSINS £T WASHINGTON. 171 toreatened to kill, and he knew weU enough he was me man t6 blose the' mouth of anyWeWnbtf-onbied mm, so he went off, driven Iikeapoor fraH being be tween irresolution and fear; took drinks, feigned to he doingbispart.talked'-vAliantly while th&rhm was iri Jiis throat, promised gloriously, galloped round fiercely, talkeddaggers, and When the ririurT struck did nothing and ran. '¦ - .^ --..- The specification charges that about 10*15 he was -lying in wait to' miirdpr. &c, ajnd tlie counsel contends that all tbe circumstances pan be accpunted ibf. The prisoner had opportunity to lip in wait, arid as there was no proof that he did, he should be considered guiltless of the attempt to riaurder. If the theory "of -*bls attempting to murder be adopted, itis'riaet with de nial at every point. He tried to become a hero, but Was only a eoadhmaker, abs&hjtfely without courage. The plain, unvarnished .statement is that during the -latter part of February. John Surratt and" Booth wanted a man who upderstodd boating, and Would both get a boat and ferry aparty over the Potomac oh a capture. SUrratt knew Atzeroth. and urider th,e ha- fluenceof great promises of a fortune, consented to furnish the bdat and do the ferrying Over. This plot was attempted on the' 18th of March and failed. Booth, however, kept his subordinates ririiri- flfbrmed of his plans, exqebt that it Was Understood' the '©resident was to be captuf eU Meanwhile' everyi.ody Was waiting for Booth. Oa the J'3th" of March Atzeroth went to the Kihamel House. On the' 1st of April he talked of future wealth; oh th,e eth he spoke to Lieu tenant Keim, over their liquor, of using one 'if ' the other failed. On'the'iath he stopped at the Kirkwood, fend tried" to sell thp bay horse to Pope; on the 14th gBooth unfolded .his plans at the Herndon House, and Atzeroth refused; from i,he Herndpn HPuse he Went *o Oyster Bay till ten, arid took drinks; at ten he took ¦a drink with Fletcher; at ten minutes past ten be tqok a drink at the Kirkwdod House: at twenty minutes past ten ditto at Kimmel, and rode about the city; at eleven returned his horse':" at twelve' he was at the Navy Ya^d; at two he went to bed; ¦' Next morning at five he got" rip and went to George town, pawned his pistol, aiid went to "Mr. Mettfsft' on the KJth.'tobk dihrier at Mett's; Ph Sunday evening he fwerit' to' Hartman TSichter's; on' the ljHh he was ar rested. "This ehds this history. Which riaight have be come a tragedy, but which the prisoner has" turned to a farce." Hewas riding round from bar-room to bar room while Payne Was at Seward's; and it IS plain he was drunk. After his peregrinations,- to charge him with lying in wait, &c'., is paylrig hTria an undeserved compliment. There is npt a piirticle' of the Specifica tion proved, but the immedlate'contrary. During the whoie of the evening, so tar as the evidence throws any light on his conduct, instead of lyirig In wait near to the Vice President, he was standing at the1 differpnt bars frbna: the tTriidn House to the^Kimhael Hqus.8, witb the intent then and there unlawfully and riiali- cipusly to make Atzeroth drunk. BOOtfe. employed him"for an emergency. He was especially competefit.toper;brm-in-bheplan to capture,* .fofurnlsh the boat, andto carry the'p'arty acrbss'the Jpotomac. For participating in the President's mux- -der-be never could have been .intended. Booth was, as his conduct shows, anxious to carry off the glory of the thing. He remarked that he wanted "no botch- iri£ With General Grant." He must have known when ¦be told Atzeroth to take charge of the Vice President, ¦that he had not the courage and did not care particu-, larly whether he accomplished-it or nob. '" The charge is divisible in two separate and .distinct; parts, "with combining, confederating," etc., "on or, beiore the 6th of March,"etc. And even suppose he- :was proven guilty of the charge and specification, 'be nas already turned State's evidence -bo the Provost Marshal, and therefore his punishment would fall 'under tbe practice usual iu ail' courts of justice, that one confessing has an equitable right to the leniency of the Court. His case, b'bwpv.e'r',' rests on ho such 'siehder grbund'. Instead of conspiring to kill, he re fused to kill; instead of lying in wait to murder„he Iritoxifcatied b'iins'eirat thp appointed hour, .and the "next morning ran away. • He is guilty solely ot what he confesses, of conspiring to abduct the President, and ofthat he can'befbuha guilty only urider a new indictment. "Mr. Aikeriread the' arguriaput in behalf of, Mrs. Sur ratt, comniencing as' folmWs:— 1 'For the lawyer, as well as the soldier, there is an equally' pleasant duty, an equally imperative com- iriarid: That duty Is ' to' ' shelter from injustice and Wrong the innocent; to 'protect the Weak from oppres sion, arid to rally, at.au' tones' arid' oh .all' occasions when' necessity demands it; to1 the special defense of those Whom nature, 'custona.or Vcirpumstarices may 'have placed in depptaderice.upon our strength, honor, and cherishing regard. Ihat Cimariaand emanates and Reaches each class from tb\e same authoritative soutce. impartial trial, and hence, In the absence of other considerations, there was no necessity (or this trial before a military Court. If such a precedent he set we may have fastened, upon us a military despotism. It might be this ar raignment before a military Court was more conve nient arid conviction more certain than before a civil tribunal. The Judgp Advocate had said that the parties were tried under tbe common military law. This was a quiddity, and might make a fictitious crime, arid attach an arbitrary punishment, and who may gainsay it? Our rules and articles of war are familiar to us all. We never heardof tho common laws of war having juris diction not conferred by express enactment or consti tutional grant. If the laws govern, he (Mr. Ewing) felt satisfied that his clients were safe. One of them. Dr. Mudd, had committed no crime knpwn to ihelaW. He could not be charged with' treason, nor as aiding and.abetting In the murder of the President, ior, at the time ot the tragedy, Dr. Mudd was at his residence, thirty , miles from the place of the crime. Ho certainly could not be charged with the com mission of the overt act. There were not two witnesses to show it, but there was abundant evidence to show, he did not commit the overt act. Dr. Mudd never by -himself, or with others, levied, war against the United States or gave aid and comfort tb the enemy. , i Mr. Ewing then proceeded to comment on the evi dence, claiming that there was nothing, which in the remotest degree, connected Dr. Mudd with ihe con spiracy. He ventured to say, that rarely in the annals o,f the civil trials, has the life of accused been assailed by so much false testimony, as had been exhibited in rthis case, and rarely has it been the good fortune of an innocent man to so confute and overwhelria his false accusers byapreponde,ranceoi undisputed truth. There was no reliable, evidence to show that Dr. Mudd met Booth more than twice, and that was last .November, in Charlescounty.ona mere matter of trade. Hehad never met Booth in this city. The counsel then reviewed the evidence relative to Dr. Muddjhavlng set Booth's leg and other events in that connection, arguing that from all this there was nothing to lead to a conclusion un favorable to the accused. Dr. Mudd voluntarily, not on compulsion, gave in 'ormation concerning the'route by which Booth with Harold had escaped, and instead of thanking him for this-asagoodand loyal citizen, au effort was made to punish bim. Trulyjthe ways of military justice, like those, of Providence, are inscru table and past finding out. In the course ot hisder fense Mr. Ewing said that in all the writings which had been seized there is not a scratch of a pen impli cating Dr. Mudd, nor is there anything whatever to show that he had the least intimation or knowledge either, of assassination or of abduction. He con cluded that his client could not be punished either as a principal or as an accessory before the fact, for the evidence fails to show Cither knowledge, or intimation or suspicion to commit the crime. It the prisoner was to be held responsible at all, it was a*- an accessory after the fact, and beyond all controversy there was noproof on this point. All the arguments lor the accused having been read, Associate Judge Advocate Bingham said that on Tuesr day next he would beiready with so much or his sum ming up as touches the question of the jurisdiction of the Court, and he hoped, by the next day, to deliver tbe conclusion of his argument. , The Court then adjourned untiL Tuesday morning, at 11 o'clock. Washington, June 27.— The Court met at 1 1 o'clock: When Judge Advocate-General Holt recalled Sandford Conover, alias J. W. Wallace, as a witness for the Go vernment. , Judge Holtsaid he held! i his hand a volume con taining the judicial proceedings in thecase of theSt. Albans raid, and asked tbe witness whether bis evi dence therein was truthfully reported. The, witness said the testimony to which General Holt had espe cially reierred was partly his, but associated witb that of another person named Wallace. Q. Do you remember how many/persons named Wallace gave testimonvon that trial? A. There were three so far as I know; William Pope Wallace. J. Wat son Wallace, and J.AVarace; what was read from the wprkjust now was the report of the Montreal Tele graph, printed from the type of that newspaper; the report which appeared in the Montreal Witness was correct. This was read as follows:— " James Watson Wallace said:-I reside at presentin this city and have been here.since October: I formerly resided in the Con'ederate States: I know James A Seddon; he occupied the position o Secretary of War I should say the signatures to the papers M.W andh are those of the said Seddon; I have on several occasions seen tbe signature of James A Seddon and h.veseen him onseveral occasions write his name. He has signed documents in my presence, and handed them to me aftersigninsLE never belonged to the Con- iederate army, but haveVgeen many commissions is sued by the Confederate Government; the commission ot Lleuteuant Young, marked M., Is in the usual form; the army commissions are, always signed by theSe<> retary of War; I have never seen a commission with the nanae, or the President or with the seal of the Go vernment; the Conlederate States at the time I left the pountry had no seal; one had been designed, but not prepared." ° ?iSl?3i.tn^B^irark?,:ltnftfc tn*e above was substan tially what hp did say; it was clipped either from the Montreal Witness or the Herald. Q. State whether, after you gave your testimony lb this Court, you visited Montreal. A. I lelt here per haps the same day. * TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 113 Q. Whom did you meet there of those spoken of as refugees? A, I met Tucker, Carroll, Dr. Pallen. ex- Governor Wescott, George Sanders. Lewis Sanders, his son. and a number of others: I bad a free conversa tion with some of them, especially witb Tucker and Sanders. Q. What did Tucker say, so far as the purpose of those men was concerned? A. They had not the slightest idea that I had testified before this Commis sion, and received me with greatfeordiality; tbesubject of this trial was generally discussed; Tucker, after de nouncing Secretary Stanton and President Johnson as scoundrels, spoke of Judge Holt as a bloodthirsty old ¦villain; he said they must protect themselves by aguard at present: "but, by tbe Eternal, the davot reckoning wlllcome.and thev would have along account to settle:" Sanders did not make such violent threats as Tucker did; William S. Cleary, Whom he also met, made simi lar violent threats; he said that Beale would have been pardoned by the President bad it not been for Judge Holt: be also said blood should follow blood; be reminded me of what be had formerly remarked con cerning President Lincoln. "That retributive justice had come, and the assassination of the President was the beginning of it." Q. After giving your testimony here did you not go toCanadafor me? A I did, to get a certified copv of the record; at Montreal I met these conspirators; I had not been there long when they discovered that my testimony had been published; I received a mes- pagefrom Sanders, Tucker,- Carroll and O'Donnell, a Virginian, sometimes called McDonnell. Q.. The man who boasted of setting fire to houses in New York? A. He so boasted: I went into the sa loon to wait until the public offices were opened; whife sitting there about ten minutes a dozen Bebels surrounded me; they accused me of having betrayed tbeir secrets: not knowing at the time that my testi mony had been published I denied it; they said if I would give them a letter to that effect it would be -well; Just as I was about to getaway Beverly Tucker came in: he said a mere letter would not do, because I had testified before the Court, therefore I must give some paper under oath to make my denial sufficiently strong; about a dozen of these men assailed me in a furious manner; O'Don nell took out his pistol and said unless I did so I should neverleavethe room alive: at last Sanders said, "Wal lace, you see what kind of bands you are in;" I at length consented: It was understood that I was to pre pare the paper in my own way: I intended, however, not to prepare the paper but to escape from them at ]the most convenient opportunity: Mr. Kerr was jheu gent for to prepare the paper: two of Morgan's men Were there; a pistol was again drawn on me; Kerr came and the affidavit was prepared and I signed it and went through the ceremony of an oath. Q, Did you know tbat.Kerr had knowledge of these menaces? A. Itirrust have so appeared to hirhyfor Tucker said if I did not sign the paper I should never leave the town alive, and that tbey would follow me to . f Q. Did that paper appear in the Telegraph, and was it afterwards copied- Into the New York World? A. It ¦did (the paper was read); it appeared in tbe Montreal Evening Telegraph, of June 10th, and is to the effect that -If President Johnson will send him (James W. Wallace) a safe conduct to go to Washington, and to return to Montreal, he would proceed hither arid go before the Military Court and makeproffer of himself in order that they may see whether he was thesame Sandford Conover who' swore as stated; this Is dated June 8th, 18R5. and is s;gned James W. Wallace; to this the affidavit before referred to is appended namely:— "I am the same James W. Wallacewho gave evi dence on the subject of the St. Alban's raid, which N evidence appears in page 212 of the printed report of "¦"She case; lama native of Loudon county, Virginia; I resided in Montreal in October; 1 have seen ahd ex amined the report of what is called tbe suppressed evidence before the court-martial now being holden at Washington on Mrs. Surratt, Payne and others, atfd I have looked carefully through the report of the evidence in the New York papers of a person calling himself Sandford Conover, wboreferred to tbe fact that whilst in Montreal he went by the name of James Watson Wallace, and gave evidence in the St. Alban's raid investigation; that said Conover evi dently personated me before the said court-mar tial: that I never gave any testimony what soever before tbe said court-martial: that I never gave any testimony whatsoever before the ¦aid court-martial at Washington City; that I never had knowledge of John Wilkes Booth, except , seeing him on tbe stage, and did not know he was in Montreal until I saw it published after the murder of President Lincoln: that I never was a correspondent of the New York Tribune; that I never went- under the name of Sandford Conover: that I never had any confidential conversation witb George N. Sanders, BP- veriyTucker, Hon. Jacob Thompson; General Carroll. of Tennessee, Dr. M. N. Paller, or any of the others therein mentioned; that my acquaintance with every ©neof these gentlemen was slight, and in fine, Ihave no hesitation in stating that the evidence of tbe said Conover personating me is false, untrue and un founded In fact, and is, from beginning to end, a tissue offalsehoods. I have made this deposition voluntarily, and Injus tice to my own character and name. (Signed) <-j. WATSON WALLACE/* This was sworn to before G. Smith, Justice of the Peace, at Montreal, on the 8lh of June, inst: Alfred Terry testified that Wallace subscrieed to the paper of his own tree will, ised by the several counsel for tbe,defense,'an!i*l also OU-tbe testimony , adduced for and against the accused-, \ desire to he just to.them, just to you, just to my Corintry, and.iust to my own convictions. The issue joined involves the highest interests of the accugett, and, in uy judgment, the highest interests of the whole jjtrjoplc oi'the United States. Ip is .a platter Of great moment to all thepeoph? of thi;s,CQuo&'V that the prisoners at your bur be lawfully wibo and lawfully conVictedoracguiLted. A wrongful and. 'tliega^. conviction or a wrongful aud I-HegaFae- duitt'al hpori this dread issue' would impair somewhat the security .or pvpry map's life, and shake the stability j^tjthe republic. ' ^Thc cririae charged -and'Specified upon yourrecord is pot simply the crime of murdering a -human-being, bift it is the cr^ept'J^lling andrnaur,dtring-on the 14th day of April. A. D. TRU5, Within the military department of ftfashiagton andithe 4ntnenphed lines thereof, jAbra- ham Lincoln, then President of the United.States, and •Commander-'in-jCbief of tbe army apd ;riavy ' thereof; and then andithere lassau-ltsng, with intent to •fcill and -muixler, William 3L Soward, then Secre tary of State of tbe United States; and then, and there lyingin wait fro, 'kill and -murdej* Andrew Johnson, men Vice President of 'the United States, and Ulysses S-fiilaaat, then Lxui. -General and in command.of ihe (srmdesot theUnii.ed-"dtittes,!in pursuance.ofatBeasorir able Goospiiaccv. entered into hy theaccused wifjh ope atfiin WUkes Booth, iand John H. Surratt, -upon the instigation' >of Jefferson JDavis. .Jacob Thompson, George N. ajandem and others, with intent- thereby to llidihe. bxistnag Rebellion .and , subvert the,Constitu- fton and laws of the United Stabes. -. -tfhe.Beibei-liO.n, in aid of which this conspiracy was formed and this great public crimeiQQmmitted, was Jwosdcutedfur'the -vindication of no ri£l\t,fqr the-re- areEis of no wrong, -but- was itself simply ^criminal conspiracy-and giganiio assassination, lnresis/iiug and crushJn.'r this Bebellion the American people- take no stop backward,. and cast ; no -reproach upon, their past history. That peopl'9;uow. an ever.jprQclaim. the.seli- e-vrident - truth ;ithait whenever iGovennmen-t beconies subversive of "the-endsaf its creation, £t Lis theojight -ftndidutypf the people to alter and abolish it; ibutdur- fcag -these four years of conflict tbey have as clearly larcei aimed, as was .their rightfan The learned counsel (or the,accused, when they rnake JihisayprmpAt by w.ay of .argument, owe'ib to them selves and to their country toshow how the President COUldfOtheEwise,;awfully and efh^cienLly .discharge -tho duty enjoined .upon him by his oath to protect, prer Herye^-anil^ei'eud theh Constitute on of the UnitediStatea, and totakepai-ethat theiaws be faithfully executed! AUie^isttng B-ebellion Js alleged and not denied. It ia Charged that in a*l of tin's. existing Bebellion a cpar spiracy wasppterod into i>y the accused, incited and instigated thereto by thaciuefaQi this Bebellion. ;tokiU and murder .the executi,v.e,oiLhpers of the Cover-amenu and tbe co.ina-n1iari4fir,W1'thejirmies oi'the United State* and-thatth>s cou,spiracy was par,tly executediby tha -murder of Abi-aham -Lmcyln, and ,by a murderous Assault upon thp Secretary of State; and counsel -re ply, by elaborate ,arsuunervt- thaj .although the facta (He as charged, it bough jthe ppnspiratoxa be jiomeroui andatiarge, al.le and eager to conipiete .theihorrld work of assassination .already ibegup within your military encampment, yeb the.successor of your mu£ dered Presideptis i\ usurper -if hp attempts by milir ttaryfoi-ce-^ud martial latv. ,as Commanaer-in-ChleJL toprevept ih.e cons urn miction of this traitorous, coo* ¦spiracyin aidof^this troasonable Bebellion. The civil -Courta.,say the .counsel, .are open -in the District. 1 answer, they are .closed thmugbout halt tbe Benublia. and were only open in this jQSatxict on the dayotthw confederation aud conspiracy, on the day ot the t«i- torous.assussinatiou oryour president, and are only open,atthishou;r, by forceof the bayonet. Does any -mau-supppse that if the military lorca-i ^hich garri son the liitrenchments of your capitaK fifty thonsand trppg, were,»?,U with draw... the Bebel bands who this LViiilest trip mountain parses in your vicinity would >allttW tbis Court, or any .Cpurt, to remai,n-open in this ,Di$triat far t.hertrial of these their confederates, or wouidiiter.mu your executive ofnci.rfl to dwebaree the tTUSt.-cpmnnttcfl to them, .for twenty-four boiiis? Atthptime tpis -conspiracy was entered Into, and When this-Court, was convened, and entered upon tha trial, the country. was in,a slate of.oivihwar. An ajcmr iof msuri-ect;onists have, -since this trial beguu, shed the blood oif Union soi.dicrsfin b:#tle. '1 be cpnv5pirato£ by whose hand his co-canspUiaton.whether-preaentojr abseut.jointly murdeiedthojl'res flent on the Mth of ,lasb ARnl. couid nob be ^nd was not arrested upon Civil p«>eess_,ibnt was .pursued by the military powar pf the Government, captured and slain. Was this .anactpf usurpation, a, violation of, tho rigsht guaran- itied lo that -lleeing assassin by the very Constitution against. winch and for-thesubversion of which he-had CQns.pireaandmuirrter.ea tlje President? Who in all thts.laml is bold enough.or base enough. to assert it? ¦IwoiUd-be-glttdio-k-no-wb^ what law -thePresident -by ,a rniiitary force, .acting only upon bis imilitarr QpflOTs, is justified in purauAng, arresting, and billinfl ope jot these.cQiispicatQrs... an^ -is condemned for arresv Ing Hi-Hfce mauner, and by We.Qrdersubjectiug.to.trial, aQOQrddng to the laws ,of -wetivany^r&il of the other jirp;ahc ve "^picfoi^ itbp.aacupedtheinse'l'Veft. «<-»k«h*-ju »to*i ujr Th-p ar-rument against 'the jurisdiction of this .court wests -upon vhoassttmiwiionthttt lti,von iu time of insuc- rectionaud civil war. no.cuimea aro cogni?abl3Tnrt puniflhftblebymUitpry compi^ssiun or cSurtmartiaL -say-s crimes committed in the mlliury or navaUer- 7 Jf 2£SJlftSe *lXn* to*a f&i-ajtcM. or -in trip militia of the sevi ffiiK8f&25.en S^Wi "^S? Ahe ^tual service of tha Sh.1^1 ^ta,teg" »« r-n*** uot rail *he argument; it ?S^'ihat^nd?r,jthla P1^* 't0 tb* jurisdiction, the*©- cusedhave he, right to demand that this court shaM decide thatit is not ajudicial tribunal andh:*s no Ie .«*is%ai*ns-3. TRIAL 0¥ THE 'ASSASSINS \AT WASHINGTON. 17§ . -SPhis is a mpst^extraordtoai'y^^O'POsi^ri'. tnat &u iPresident, under the Constitution and Jaws of the United States, was not only inot autboiiized out absor lutely forbidden to constitute this oourt for the trial of the -accused, and. therefore, the act of the President is void, aud the gentlemen who compose the tribunal Without judicial authority or power, aud are not in fact orlnAawacourt. That I do not misstate what is claimed and- at tempted to be established on behalf.otf.tbe.accpsed,, I aTk the attention of the.Court to the following as, the gentleman's (Mr. Johnson's) propositions:— . That Congress has riot authorized, and. under the Constitution, cannot authorize tbe appointment of th is Commission. That this Commission has, "as a Court, no legal ex istence or authority," because the president, who alone appointed the Commission, has no such power. That bis act '-is a mere nullity, tbe .usurpation ofa power not vested in the Executive, ami conferring no authority upon you.'' We have had no common exhibition of -law learning in ihis defense, prepared by a Senator of the United States; but with all his experience, and all bis leu rn- inffi and acknowledged ability, he has failed, utterly jailed, to show how a. tribunal constituted p,nd sworn, as this has been, to duly try and determine the charge ana specification against theaccused. and by its Coin- mission not authorized to .hear or determine any other Issues whatever, can rightfully .entertain, or can by any possibility pass upon, the proposition presented by this argnmentoi tnegentlpi-a.au Ipi? i,ts consideration. The members pf this ^Courp .are officers in the army of the United States, and by order of the Presi dent, as Commander-in-Chief, are required to dis cbarge this duty,. and are authorized in this capacity to dis l uuge no other .duty, to exercise no other -Judicial power. Of course, if the commission of trig Pj-esidpnt constitutes this a Court for the trial of this case ouly, assuchCquiit it is competent to decide all questions of law and Jact arising in the trial of the pase. ' But th is Court has no power, as a Court, to declare ihe autho rity by which it was constituted nu.il and void and the actpf .the President a mere nullity, a usurpation. Has it been shown by the learned gentleman who' de mands that this Court shall so decide, that officers or the army may lawfully and constitutionally question In thisjnanner (Jieyrders of their Commander -In-Chief, disobey, set them aside a< d declare them a nullity arid a usurpaLion"? Eveu If it be conceded that the officers thus detailed by order of the Commander-in-Chief ipaay Question and utterly disregard bis order and'set aside his authority, js it possible, in the nature of things, tbai.any body of men. constituted and qualified as a tribppal of justice, can sit iu judgment upon the pro position that they are not a Court far any purpose. and finally dec. do judicially, as a Court, that the Go vernment \vhic'u appointed them was without autho rity? Why not crown ,the absurdity of this proposi tion by asking the several ndembpfs '.of this Co\irt ,to determine that they are'not 'men. dying, intelligent, responsible men? This "^ould he up more irrational ihan tho qpesiipn upon which -they area-£ed to pass. How can any sensible man entertain it? Before he begins to reason upon -the proposition he must take lbr granted, and thereiore decide iri advance the very question in dispute, to wit, his actual existence.' .iSQwith the question presented in this remarkable grgumoait lpr^thc defense, before this Cqui;t can enter Upon the inquiry Qithp want of authority in the Presi dent to , cpri-ititjUte them a Court, tqey must take for granted and decide tbe very point in issue, that the -President hfad' the.au thorityvand' that' they are, iri law apd in fact, a judicial tribqna.l; and, having assumed pais, they i:rc gravely asked, as such judicial-tribunal, fx) finally and -iolemnly decide and declare thab they ai*e.nQtiu fact or in law a judicial, tribunal, buta mere jaulhty and riqnefttity. A pav?t lame and impptent conclusion! && tbe learned counsel seems to have great-reverence for judicial authority, au.d requires precedent, for every OMiiion. 1 miiyi>ep^donpd for sayiug that the obj'Pc- fliliion-that it has no legal,existeHPeas aCourt,,and that |he,-f pppintment was a.usiiifpatiqn and. without autho rity oi law, has been .solemnly ruled by the Supreme iCourt of the .United States, . That^ourtsay:— "The acceptance of the judicial office Js a. raqognUion or the authority from which it Is de rived. J,i a coiirt should enter upon ,the inquiry (whethpr the authority of the Government which esta blished it> preme'eourt, and puch inferior courts as Congress may establish," the jpdges whereof "shall bold their offices during good behavior." ¦ « .. * It is a sufficient answer tp say to the gentleman, that the power of this Government to try and punish mili tary offenses by military tribunals is no part of the "judicial power of the United.sta.tes, .urider the 3d ar ticle of the Cohstltution, but a ppwer conferred* by the £th section of tbe 1st article, arid so it has been ruled by the Supreme Court in Dyres vs. Hoover, 20 Howard 78. If this power iq so conferred by the 8th section, a TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. military court authorized by Congress, and constituted as this has been to try all persons for military crimes in time of war, though not exercising "the judicial power" provided for in the 3d article, is nevertheless a court as constitutional as the Supreriae Court Itself. The gentleman admits this to the extent of the trtal, by courts-naartial, Of persons in the military or naval service, and by admitting it, he gives up the point. There is na*cxprrss grant for any such tribunal, and the power to establlsb snchacqurt, therefore, is implied from the provisions of the Btb section, 1st article, that "Congress shall have power to prpvide'and maintain a nayy," and also *'to.naake rules for the government ot the land and naval force*}." From these grants tha Suprerhe Court infer the power to establish courts-mar tial, and from the grants In the same 8th section, as I shall notice herealter, that "Congress shall have ppwer to declare war." and "to pass all laws necessary and proper to.carry this and all other powers into effect," it is necessarily implied that in time of war Congress may authorize military cojaamlssions to try all crimes committed 'in aid of trie public enemy, as such tribunals arp riecessary to giveetfect to the power to make war and'suppress insurrection. l.Inasmucb as the gentleman (General Ewing) for whom, personally, I have a high regard* as the mili tary commander of a Western Department made a liberal exercise, under tbe .Order ofthe Commander in- Chief of the army, of this power to arrest and try mili tary offenders not in the land or naval forces, of the United States, and inflicted upon them, as lam in formed, the ex'tremepenaltyof the law byyirtueo'f bis military jurisdiction. I Wish to know whetber'he proposes, by his proclamation of the personal responsi bility, awaiting all such usurpations of judicial autho rity, that be himself shall'be suibjebtedto thesame Btern judgment .which ,he. invokes 'against' others; that, in short, he, shall be drawn and quartered for in- flicting.thp extrenaepenalties of the law Upon citizens of the United States in violation of the Constitution andlaws of his country? I trust that his error or 'Judg ment in pronouncing this military jurisdiction a usur pation and violation of the Constitution may not rise UP in judgment to condemn him. and .that he -may never be subjected to pains and penalties for having done his duty heretofore in exercising this rightful au thority, and in bringing to judgment those who con- BJpired against the lives and liberties' ofthe people. .' Here I, might leave th:s question, committing it to the charitable' speeches of men, butfor the fact that the learned counsel has been more careful in his-extia- ordinary argument to denounce the President as a usurper than to show how the Court could possibly de- cide.that it has no judicial existence, and yet that it has judicial existence. , , A representative of the people and ofthe rights of the people before this Court.by the appointment of the President, and which appointment was neither sought by me nor desired, I cannot allow all that has here been said by way of denunciation of the murdered President aud his successor tb pass unnoticed. ^ This has been made the occasion by tbe learned counsel, Mr. Johnson, to volunteer, not to defend the accused, Mary E. Surratt. not to make a judicial argument in her behalf, but to make apolitical harangue, a partisan speech against his Government and country, and thereby swell the cry of the armed legions of sedition and rebellion that but yesterday shook the heavens With their iniernal enginery of treason , and filled the habitations of the people with death. %As the law for bids a Senator of the United States to receive compen sation, or fee, for defending, In cases before civil or military,, commissions, the gentleman volunteers to make aspeech beiore this Court, in which be de nounces the action of the Executive Department in proclaiming and executing martial law against Rebels In arms, their aiders and abettors, as a usurpation and a tyranny. I deem it my duty to reply to this denun ciation, not for the purpose of presenting thereby any .question for tho decision of this Court, for I have shown that the argument of the gentleman presents no question for lbs decision as a Courb, but to repel, as far as I may be able, the unjust aspersion attempted to be cast upon the memory of our dead President and upon iheohicici conduct of bis successor. . I propose no w to answer fully al I that the gentleman .fltfr. Johnson) has said ofthe want Of Jurisdiction in this Court, and of the alleged usurpation and tyranny of the Executive, that the enlightened public opinion, to which he appeals, may decide whether all this -de nunciation i3,just; whether, Indeed, conspiring against the whole people, and confederation and agreement in aid ol insurrection to murder all the executive officers of tho Government, cannot be checked or arrested by the executive power. Let the people decide this ques tion, and in doing so, let them pass upon the action of the Senator as well as upon the action of those whom he so arrogantly arraigns* His plea In behalf of an ex piring and shattered rebellion is a fit subject for public consideration and-ior public condemnation. Let that people also note, that while the learned gen tleman (Mr. Johnson i, as a volunteer, without pay, thus condemns as a usurpation tbe means employed so effectually to suppress this gigantic insurrection, the New York News, whoso proprietor, Benjamin Wpod, to shown, by1 the testimony upon your record, to have received from the asrents ofthe "Rebellion twenty-five thousand dollars, rushes into the lists to chamnion tbe cause of the Rebellion, its aiders and abettors, by lol- lowing to the letter bis colleague (Mr. Johnson), and with greater plainness ot speech, and a fervor intensi fied, doubtless, by the twenty-five thousand dollars received, and the' hope of more, denounces the Court as a usurpation, and threatens the members with the con sequences! ' Tbe argument of the gentleman to which the Court has listened so patiently and so long is but art attempt to show tbat it is unconstitutional lor the Government ofthe United States to arrest upon military order, aud try before military tribunals, and punish upon convic tion, in accordance with the laws of war and the usages of nations, all criminal offenders actiug in aid ofthe existing Rebellion. It does seem to me that the speech in its toneand temper is the same as that which tbe country has beard ior the last four years, uttered by the armed Rebels themselves and by their ¦ apologists* averring thauit was unconstitutional for the Govern ment 01 the United States to defend by arms its own rightful authority and the supremacy ofits laws. ' It is as clearly the right of the Republic to live and to de end its lue until it forfeits that right by crime as it, is the r ght oi the individual lo live so long a- God gives liim Hie, unless he -forfeits that right by crime. I makeno argumentto support thiSproposition. Who is there here or eisewbere to cast the reproach upon my country tbat for her crimes she must die? Young est born or the nations! is she not immortal by all tbe dread memories ofthe past, by that sublime and voluntary sacrifice oi'the present, in which the bravest and noblest of ber sons have laid down tbeir lives that she might live, giving, tbeir serene brows to the (lust of tne grave, and lifting tbeir hands for the last time amidst the consuming fires of battle! I assume, for the purposes of this argument, that self-defense is as clearly the right of nations as it is the acknowledged right of men that the American people may do in tbe defense and maintenance of their own rightful au thority against organized armed rebels, tbeir aiders and abettors, whatever free and independent nations anywhere upon this globe, in time ot war, may of right do. All this is substantially denied by the gentleman in the remarkable argument which he has here made. There is nothing further from nay purpose than to do injustice to j-be learned gentleman or to his elaborate and ingenious argument. To jusbiiy what I have al ready said. T may be permitted here to remind the Court that nothing is said by the counsel touching the conuuet of tbe accused, Mary fi. burratt, as shown by the testimony; that be makes conlession at the end of bis arraignment ofthe Government and country, that be has not made such argument, and that ho leaves it tobe made by herotber counsel. He' does take-care. however, to arraign the country and the Government lor conducting a trial with closed doors and before a secret tribunal, and compares tbe proceedings of this Court to tbe Spanish Inquisition, using tbe strongest words at his command to intensify the horror which he supposes his announcement will excite throughout the civilized world. ' Was this dealing fairly by this Government? "Was there anything in the conduct of tbe proceedings here that justiiied any such remark? Has this been a secret trial? Has it not been conducted in open day, in tbe presence of theaccused, and in the presence o -.'seven gentlemen learned in the law, who appeared from day to day as their counsel? Were they not informed of the accusation against them? Were tbey deprived of the right of challenge? Was it not secured to them of law, and were they not asked to exercise it? Has any part of the evidence been suppressed? Have not ail the proceedings been published to the world? What, then, was done, orintended to be done, by the Govern ment which justifies this clamor about a Spanish In quisition? That a people assailed by organized treason over an extent of territory half as large as the continent of Europe, and assailed in their very capital by secret as sassins banded together and hired to do the work of murder by the instigation of these conspirators, may riot be permitted to make inquiry, even witb closed doors, touching the nature and extent of the organiza tion. oujUit not to be asserted by any gentleman who miakes the least pretensions to any u bowl edge ot the law, either common, civil or military. Who does not know that at the common law all inquisition touching crimes and misdemeanors, preparatory to indictment by the grand inquest ofthe State, is made with closed doors? In this trial, no parties accused, nor their counsel, nor the reporters of this Court, were at any time ex cluded from lbs deliberations when any testimony was beltig taken; nor1 has there been any testimony taken in the case witb closed doors, save that ofa tew "wit nesses, who testified, not in regard to theaccused or either of them, but In respect to tbe traitors and con spirators not on trial, who were alleged to have incited this crime. Who is there to say that the American people, in time of armed Rebellion and civil war, have not the rigbt to make such examination as secretly as they may deem necessary, either in a military or civil court? TRIAL OF -THB; ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. ITT Ihave said this, not by way of apolOgy!for anything the Government has done or attempted to do intne progress of this trial , but to expose the animus ofthe argument, and to repel1 the1 accusation against my cnuntrv sent out to the World by the counsel. From anything tbat he has said. I have yet to learn that the 'American people have not the right to make their in quiries secretly, touch ing a general conspiracy in aid of an ex-sting rebellion, whicb involves tbeir na tionality andthe peace arid security of all. 1 The gentleman t lien enters into a learned argument for the purpose of showing that, by the Constitution, the people of the United States cannot, inwaroriri peace, subject any person to trial hefore a military tribunal, whatever naay be his crime or o dense1, unless such person be iri the'military or naval -service of the United States. 'Ihe conduct of this argument is as re- "markable as its assaults upon the Government are unwarranted, and its insinuations' about the revival of the inquisition 'ahd secret trials are inexcusable. The Court will notice'thatthe argument, from tbe be ginning almost to its conclusion, insists that no person TsliabetO' e tried by military or martial l^w before a military tribunal; save those in 'the land' arid naval service of the Uri.ted States. I repeat, the 'conduct Of thjs argument ofthe gentleman is remarkable. As an instance, I ask the attention, not orily of this Court, •buttof that public whom be bjas ventured tb address in thistone. and temper, to the .authority of tbedistin- guisbed Chancellor Kent, whose great name the coun sel has endeavored to press into his service in support of his generarpropo3i.t!bn..thatno person" save those in the military or naval serv ce of the United States is liable to be tried fbr auy crime whatever, either iu peace or in' war, before a military tribunal. ' The language of tbe gentleman, after citing the pro vision of the Constitution, ''that' no person shaft be held to answer lor a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the' land or naval forces, or in tbe militia!, when in actual servicem time of war or public danger," is "that this exception is de signed to leave in 'itarce, not to enlarge, the power Vested in Congress by the original Constitution to make rules fbr- the govern ment and regulation of the laud and naval forces:' tbat tbe land or naval forces are thp terms iraed in both, have the saniemeaning, 'and until lately have been supposed by every com mentator and judge to Pxclude from mil itary jurisdic tion offenses committed bv citizens not belonging to such forces."* The learned gentleman then adds:— "Kenb, iri a note to his 1st Commentaries, 341, states, and with accuracy, tbat 'military and naval crimes and offenses, committed while tbe party is attached to and under the immediate authority of the army and navy of the United State's arid in actual service, are not cognizable under the common law jurisdiction of the courts of the United States.' " 'I ask this Courtto bear in mind tbat this is the only passage which he "quotes from this note of Kent' in his argument, and 'that no man possessed of common sense, however destitute he may be ofthe exaGt and varied learning in th& law to Which the gentleman may rightfully lay claim, can for a moment entertain the opinion tbat the distinguished Chancellor of New York, in the passage 'just cited, iritimates any such tbing as-the counsel asserts tbat tbe Constitution excludes frdm military jurisdiction offenses committed by citizens not belonging to tbe land or naval lorces. r Who can tail -to see that Cbancellor'Kent; bylhp passage cited, only decides that military and naval crimes and Offenses comhaicted by a party; attached to and under the immediate authority ot the Army and Navy ofthe United States andin actual service; are not cognizable under tbe common law jurisdiction -of the Courts of the United States ? He only says they are not cognizable under its common 'law juris diction; but by tbat be does not say- or intimate, what Is attempted to be said' by the counsel tor him, that " all crimes committed by citizens are by ihe'Constitu- tion excluded from militarv jurisdiction," arid tbat the perpetrators of them can under no circumstances be tried before military tribunals. Yet the counsel ven tures to proceed; standing unon this passage quoted froria Kent, to say that, ** according to this jjreat autho rity, every other class of persons aud every other spe- ^cies of offenses are within the jurisdiction of tne civil Courts, and entitled to the protection ofthe proceeding by presentment or indictment and the public trial in Such a Court." ' ej , ' ' *' Whatever that great authority may have said else where, it is very doubtful whether any candid man in America Will be ableto come to the very learned and astute conclusion that Chancellor Kent has sostated in the note or any'part of thenote which the gentleman has just cited. If he has said it elsewhere, ft is for the gentleman, if be relies upon Kent lor authority, topro- uce' the passage. But was it fair treatment of this " great authority"— was It not taking an unwarrantable privilege With the distinguished Chancellor, and his great work,* the enduring monument of his learning and genius, to so mutilate the note referred tQ, as Might leave tbe gentleman at liberty to make his de tractions and assertions under cover of the great name of the New York chancellor, to suit the emergency of his case, by omitting the following passage, which oc curs in the same note, and absolutely excludes the conclusion so defiantly put forth by the coorisel to support his argument? In that note Chancellor Kent says*— "Military law is a system of regulations for the go vernment of the armiies In the service 6f the United States, authorized by the' act of Congress of April 10, 1806, known as bbe Articles ot War. and naval law is a similar system fot the government of the navy, under tbe act of Congress of April 23, 1800. But martial ltxvr is quite a distinct thing, and is founded upou para mount necessity, and proclaimed by a- military chief." However unsuccessful, after this exposure, thegeni tleman appears in maintaining ins monstrous proposi tion, that tbeAmerican people are by their own Con"- stiiution forbidden to try the alders and abettors of armed traitors and rebellion before military tribunals, and subject them, according to the law3 of war and the usages of nations to just pbnlshment for their freat crimes, it bris been made clear from what have already"stated that he has been eriimeiitly suc cessful in mutilatingthls beautiful production Of that £reat mind; which act of mutilation every one knows is violative'aiike ofthe laws of peace and vvar. Even in war the dlvi.ie creations of. art and the Immortal pro ductions of genius aud learning arGspared. In thesame spirit, and it seems to me with the same unfairness as -that just noted, the' learned gentleman has very adroitly pressed into his service, by an extract from the autobiography of the war-worn veteran and herd, General Scott, the names of the late Secretary of War Mr.Marcy.and thelearnedcx-AttorheyGerieial, Mr. Cushing. This adroit performance is achieved in this way: after stating the fact that General Scott in Mexico proclaimed martial law for the triaUmd punish ment by military triburials of persons guilty of "assas sination, murder, and poisoning, the gentleman pro ceeds to quote from the Autobiography, "that thiS order, when handed tothe then Secretary of War (M?n Marpy) for his approval, 'a startle at thP title (martial law order) was the only comment hetbenorevermade on tbe subject,' and' that it was ''soon silently returned as too explosive fiir safe handling.' 'A little later(he adds) the Attorneys-General (Mr, Cushing) called and asked for a coDy.and the law officer of the Govern ment, "Whose business It is to speak on a'l I sucli matters, was stricken with legal dumbness.' " 4'hereupon the learned gentleman proceeds to say: "How much more startled1 and more paralyzed.wbuld these great men have been bad they been consulted ori such a commis sion as ibis ! A commission not to sit in another country, and to try offenses not provided for in any law of the United States, Civil or military, then in force, but in their own country hnd In a part of it where there are laws providing fortheirtrial andpunishment, and civil courts clothed;with ample powerj for both, and in the daily and undisturbed exercise of their jurisdiction." I think I may safely say, without stopping to make any special references, that tbe official careerof the late Secretary of War (Mr. Marcy) gave no indication that lie ever doubted or denied tbeconstitutional power of the Ariaericari people, acting through their duly conj- stituted agents. to do any act justified by the laws ox war, ior the-suppression ofa rebellion or 10 repel inva sion. Certainly there1 is"nothirrg in this extract from the Autobiographs' which justifies any such conclusion1. He was startled, we are told. It may have been as much the admiration he had for the boldness and wis dom ofthe conqueror of Mexico as any aohorrence he h dforthe trial and punishment of "assassins, poisonV ers, and murderers," according to the laws and usages of war. : But tbe official utterances ofthe ex- Attorney-General Cu hlrig, with which tbegentleman doubtless was fami- Tiarwheh he prepared this argument.by no means justi fy the attempt here made to quote him as au.hority against the proclamation and enforcement of martial law In time of rebellion and civil wari Tbat distin guished riaan, not second in legal atbainments to any who bave held that position, has left an official- opinion of record touching this subject. Referring to what Is said by Sir Matthew Hale in his History of the Common Law concerning mar tial law, wherein he limits it, as the gentleman has seemed by the whole driftiof his argument desirous of doing, andsaysthat it'is "riotln truth and in reality law, but something Indulged rather than allowed as a law— thenecessity oBgovernment, order an ,j discipline in;an army," Mr. Cushing makes this just criticism: "This proposition is a mere composite blunder, a total misapprehension ofthe matter. Itconiounds martial law and lawmilitary; it ascribes to tbe former the uses ofthe latter; it erroneously assumes that the govern ment ofa bodv of troops is a necessity more than of a body of civilians or citizens. It confoundsand confuses all the relations Of the subject, and is an apt illustration of tbe incompleteness of-theriotionsof thecommon law jurists of England in regard to matters not compre hended in that limited branch pflegal science. * * * Militarv lav/. It is uowperfectly understood in England, Isa branch of thelaWof the land, applicable only to certain acts ofa particular class of persons and admin istered by special tribunals; but neither in that nor in any other respect essentially differing as to foundation in constitutional reason fWin admiralty, ecclesiastical, or indeed chancery and common luw. * * * Ti is its TRIAL QF -THE ASSA$SOT .4-T WAS^INlGTON. the system of rules for the government of tbe army and navy established by successiveactsofPaiiiament. * * ** * * Martial law, as exercisedln any country by the co'miria'riaer ofa foreign army; is an element '.of th£ jus belli* . ,.-,'¦ -'It is incidental to the state of solemn war. apd ap pertains to the law of nations. #' ¦ W . Thus, while the armies of thp United States occupied different pro- 'yiucesof the Mexican Republic, the respective com manders were not limited in authority by any local law. They allowed, of rather required, phe magis trates ofthe, country, -municipal ^judicial, to comin ue to administer the Jaws of thp country among .fJapir countrymen,- but in subjection, always tothe rpilitar.y ppraer, wuicb acted summarily and according to'dls: cretipn.when the belligerent, interestsbi theeonqueror "required it, and which exercised jurisdiction, either jaummarily'or by means of military, commissions for the protection or the puriishriipritoi citizens of the Uni ted states iri Mexico."— Opinions of Attorneys-General, vol. vni, 3G6.fl69. Mr. Cushing' says^ "That, It would .Was one of jtheformsof "martial law;" but he adds, that such an pxample of martial law administered by a foreign army in tjop enemy's country "'does not enlighbenus in regard to the question of martial law iri one's own country^ and*a3 administered by Its military ,-qpna- naaiiders. ' That iu a case which the h>w of nations oops not reach. Its regulation i3 nf the domestic resort of legislation in the jEngland "Accordingly, in England, as we baye seen. Earl Greyiassumes that when martial law exists it has no legal brigiri.but is a mere fact of aaecessity, tobe legal ized afterwards by a bill of indemnity, if there be oc- casiom -lanauot prepared tp say that, unde'r^xisting tews, such; may not also be the case inthe united Stales.'"— IMd.^70', ' After suGb a statement, wherpip ex- Attorney- General Gushing very ' cleariy recognizes .tjhe right of this -Government, as also of England, to employ -martial Jaw ai3 a means of dpi'enae in tinae Of war, whether donapstic or foreigri, he' will be as much surprised when^be feads the argument of tbe learned gentleman, wherein he is described as being struck with'iegatr. dumbness.aX tbe mere mention of pro- ciaiming*marti'al:law\andits enforcement by the ccm- mander of our army „in Mexico, as the late Secretary of'War was startled with even the mention' of its jtitje. '. , , ',' , ¦ E^pn-some ofthe reasons giveui and certainly thp power exercised by the veteran hpro hitns.plf, w, Quid peetn tobein direct, conflict with the propositions of the learned gentleman. The:Lieucenapt'-General.saysJqe "excludes fromJaj? /Order cases already cognizable by court-martial. -a,nd limits It to cases -not provided for in thpact'of. Con gress establishing ru^es 'and ' articles for thegovern- -menbnfibe armies ot the United States." Has'npt thp gentleman who attempts to presp General pcott intp nis'serviceargued arid insisted upbri'it tjhatthe. com mander of the-army cannot gubject the soldiers under jbis'cqmmand to any control or punishment whatever, save that which is providedfor in the articles? ', rtwiLlnot do. in order to sustain the gentleman's hypothesis, to say that these provisions of the Consti tution, b.' whiph.be atterinpn to fetter the power pf the f its armies, in the trial and punishment pf its soldiers in a foreign war. The law oi" the United Stfttps for the go- .vernmentof its own armies follpws tthe flag upon Tevery sea and in every land. , ' , The truth is that tbe right of the peoRle tp proclaim .and execute martial law is a necessary incident of war, and tins was the right exercised, and rightfully .exercised by Lieu tenant-General- Sjjptt ip"Mexico. Jit waB what Earl Grey has justly said was a 1\wqX of ne cessity," and, I may add, an act as clearly a^ithdrizpd as was-the act pf fighting the erieo^YWhen. th,ey ap peared before h m. , In making this exception, [the Lieutenant-General followed ther,ulp recogaizedjby the.A.'impricari authori ties on military law, jn whicb jtis declared that "m^ny .crimes committed even by military officers, enlisted men, pr, camp retainers, cannot .be tried upper the jrulps and articles of war. Military, qommissloiis must \heresorted to, for sucn.cases,. and these CQmritf?§iopP rSbouid-be ordered by the same autb.or|by,peconsti- .tu ted in ,a similar manner, and thejr proceedings pp conducted according Lo the same general ;rwlaa a,s ge neral courts-martial. — JBenet, 16. There remain for me to notice, at present, t,wo ether points in this extraordinary speech; firpt, fhat jmpra&l ' law does not warrant a jmiHba,ry qommissjqufqr.tlip. trial of nailitary;Offenses, that Is, offenses.QQ-mntfttpa Inttmepfwar in the Interests,Qf ipe (p^b^c p^emy, , and by QC-meert and agreement w-iftn the .pneriay; and -second; that martial law does no,t prevail iri. trie United States, and has never been declared by #uy .competent authority. J*, is. not necessary, as the gentleman himself has de clined to argue .the first point, whether martlaWaw authorises /the prganUation of, -military commissions by, order of '{the commander-la? -chief, to try suchpfj- ienses.-that I should' say more than thatthpaiiL-hpritg" lust "citeti'.by 'me shows that such commissions are au thorized under martial law, and are created by fthe ^onimabjder fbr'the trial of all such pf?enseS, when tbeir punishment by cpurt-inartial'j'? not provided for by fjap express sj-atutcl aw of the country. The(seco.n;d point, that martial lay? has not been der clared by-any competent authority, is an arraignment Of the tete murdered President of the United States Ipr.his proclamation of September p, 1862. declaring, jmartiaf law throughput "the United States, and of which, in- Lawrence's edition of Wheaton on Interna tional Law. P- ^22, it Is paidi."Whatev,er may be the l£r ference to be deduced either from constitutional or in ternational haw, or from the usages of European Go> vernments', as to the - legitimate depository of £h> power pf suspending tpe w;rif of habeas corpus, theyir,- tual abrogation of the judiciary in cases anectingipdi- .v.l^ualUherfy, and the establishment as matter of fact in theUnited States, by tlie? Executive alone, of mar tial law, not merely in the insurrectionary d 1st r icts, or inpases, of military occupancy, but throughout the en tire "Union, and not temporarily,, but as-an institution as perriaanenbas the insurrection ori.wbich it professes io Debased, arid caip^blp on the Bame principle of bef tpg revived In all.qa^ps' of foreign as well as civil war, are placed beyond question by the President s prpclar motion of, September 24, l$62." Tbat proclamation is as follawe:— "By the President pf the United States of America. "A PKOCLAMA-TIGN. ' "Whereas, It has become necessary to call into ser vice not only volunteers, but also portions "of the miht- tiaof '.thCfSbates, by rfa draft.'in order to suppress the insurrection existing m tne UnltedStates, and disloyal persons are no* adequately restraipedtOy the ordinary processes of law froria hindering this, measure, and from giving aid and comiort in various ways to the insurrection; Now, therefore, be it ordered, that dur ing the existing insurrection, and as a necessary means for suppressing theisame, all Bebels and Uasurr gems, their aiders and abettors, with iu the United States, arid all persons' discouraging volunteer enhsfr naents. resisting mill tiad'ratts, of guilty pf any ;dislioya|. practice, affordmg aid and comfort to Rebels, against theauthority of the United States, shall besubjebb "tp martial law, and liable to trial arid punishment by courts-martial or military commission. "Second. fThat the writ of 'J^abeas corpus js sus- pended in respect to all persona arrested, or who are pow, oi hereafter during tbe RebeUiamshall be impri soned in piny fprt, camp.. arsenal, mi^tafy prison qr other plapeipi' confinement, by any riailitary authority, or by the sentence of a'riy courVm^rtial or naimaiy commission!. , "In.witness whereof I havp hereunto set my hand and paused theseal-pf tbe United Mjites tp he affixed. "Dp'ne ,at the' pity ,6f\^Vashipgtori. this i 24th day of -September, A* U. i^C2. anoTaf jthe independence of thp United States the eighty-seyenth. "ABRAHAM LINCOLN, ' 'By tbe President : "WjijiJ^ P^- Spw^RD, Secretary of.State." This proclamation is duly certified from the War B-epartriaenttphe in full force and not revoked. and;l^ eyideric'epi record in this case; and brit a fewdays since a proclamation pf the President, of which this court Wiil.taite notice,, declares tha^ the. same remairisln full force. , 7 ; v (Jlt has been s%id laF'frOQ-tber of the counsel for the ao- cpsed (JJIr. Stpp,e) in his argument, that, admitting iw validity, jtiap proclamation peases to liave effect with the ipsiirrection. arid is terminated by it. It is true the proclamation of martial Jaw only continues duruag tbe insurrection; but inasmuch as the question ofthe exis t- enceofau insurreGtiQU;Jsa political questiqpttbedeQt- sion of whicb belongs ejcclusively tothe political ,de- piartmentof the government, tliyat .department alone pap declare its existence, arid that departnaent alpna can declare -its: termination, aijdpy $he, action of ihe polificaX department ofthe. Government every juijlcijSl .tribunal in the land .is concluded and bound. Thftt question has beep settled fpr fifty years in. this country .by the Supreme Court of theUnited States: First, in the case of Brown ys. The United States (SCranch); also Inthe prize cases .(a Black.^'Jl). I^othinK more, ftherefpr.pj«ejdpe?aTd v^qnJbisnue&i.Qnof an «*^W 'he pol itical d epartment ofthe Government Jaas heretofore proclaimed an insurrec tion, that deRarfementhaflnptyet^eolared thein^nr- xection ended, and ;tj»e event on fp$ uthof April. tary ¦trippnftj.pr f p ^ civil couajt. T^heideplarfttipii qf the learned gentleman who opened, ihejdeferise (.jJir. Johnson), .that, martial law has never been declared by any competent authoritj, as, I have already said, arraigns Mr. -Lincoln for a usur- paUpp pf. power., Does tbe,.g»ritleman mean to say that, .until Congress authorizes it, the Presidentcannot proclaim and eplorce martial law in thesuppression qf TRIAL OF THB^ ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 179 armed and organized Rebellion? Or does he only affirm that this act of the late President is a usurpa tion? The proclamation of martial law in 136*2 a usurpa- tiori,! tboughitarinedthepeoplriiii that dark hour o'f trial with the means of defense against traitorous and secret enemies- In every State and district of the coun try; though byitsusesotfleortbe guilty Were' brought to swift arid iust punishment, and others' detetr'ed from cririae or driven tofligbti; though'by this1 means the inL nocent and defenseless were protected*; though by this meaus tbe city of t/bP gentleman's residehce'was saved from the violerice arid OiKage ofthe mobiaridthe torch of tbe incendiary. But, says the gentleman, it was a usurpation, forbidden by the laws of the land ! The same Wiis Said Of the proclamation of blockade Issued April hiiuid 27, lsei. which declared a blockade oftbepoits ofthe insurgent States, and that all vessels violating the-same were subjects of capture, and, 'to gether witb tbe cargo to bP condemned as -prize. In asmuch a& COrigress'had not then recognized the ihct of civil war, these-prPGlamations were denounced as void. The Supreme Court decided otherwise, and affirmed the power of the Executive thus to subject tfheproperty on Che seas to seizure and Ponderia nation. I read from thatdeclsioo.. '"The Cdnstitutioh confers Upon the President the •Whole executive power: he is bound to take care that the laws be f&ithfu'lly executed; he is commarider-iri- chief oi'the army and navy of theUnited States, and1 toft be militia ot theseverai States when caned into the actual service bf the United States. *¦ * Whether the President, in fulfilling his duties as commander-in- chief irrtsuppressing ah insurrection, has met with such armed hostile resistance, andacivfl war or'such alarm ing proportions as wfll cornpel bim to accord trjtbfeih the character of belligerents is a question, to be decided by him, and this courc must be governed by the deci sions and acts' of the political departriaent of the Government to "frhich ttris power Was Intrusted; He must determine What degree of force the crisis de mands. "Tbe proclamation of blockade is itself official and conclusive evidence to thecourt that a state of war ex isted which demanded ind ahthotized & recourse to finch a tnehsurp under the circumstances peculiar to the case." (2 Black. 670.) It has been solemnly ruled by the same tribunal, iri an earlier case, "that the-powet is confided to the Ex ecutive ot the Union to determine when it is necessary to call out the militia bf the States to rebel invasiori." as follows:— "That ''he is riecesSarily constituted the Judge of the existence of the exigency in the first in stance, and is bound Co act according to hid belief of the facts. If he does so act, and decides to call forth the militia; his orders for this purpose arein s trict conform ity with the provisions of the law; and- It would seerri fo follow as a necessary consequence, that ever*f act done by a subordinate officer, in obedience to such orders, is equally justifiable: Tbe law contemplates that, under such circumstances, orders shall be civeri to carry thepower into effect; and it cannot therefore be a correct inference tbat any other person has a just right to disobey them. The law does not provide fbr any appeal from: the judghaent ot the President, or fo'r any right in Subordinate officers to review his decision, and in effect defeat it. Whenever a statute gives a discretionary power to any person , to be' exercised By him upon his own opinion of certain facts, it is a sound rule of construction, that the statute constitutes him the sole arid exclusive judge ofthe existence Of those facts." (12 Wheaton , si). ' Inthe light of these decisions it must be clear tb every mind tbat the question of tbe existence of an Insurrection, arid the necessity Pf Palling into requisi tion1 lpr its supptessibh both the militia of the States' and the army arid navy of theUnited states, and of proclaiming martial law, which is an essential cbridi- tlbn .of war whether foreign or domestic, must rest with the officer of the Government who is charged by the exnress terms ofthe Constitution with the per formance of this great duty for tub common defense find the execution of the laws of the Union. ' But it isfurther insisted by tbe gefetletnan in this ar- gurneti t that Congress has not authorized the estab lishment of military commissions, which are essen tial tothe judicial administration of martial law arid Hie punishment of crimes committed during Che ex istence ofa* oivil War. and especially that such com missions are not so authorized to try persons other than thoSein tbe riailitary and naval service of the United-States, or in the -militia Pf the several States. When in tbe actual service of theUnited States. The gentleman's argument assuredly destroys itself* ior fie fristste that the Congress, as the legislative depai't- meiM Of the G'ovefnhaerit. can pass no law which' either in peace or war, can constitutionally subject amy citizen ndt in tbeiarid oi- havalfdrtfes to trial for crime befdre a militaf y tribunal, or otherwise than by a Jury in the civil coui-tS; • Why doeS the learned geiitleman nbW tell iis that Congress has riot authorized this to be done, after d e daring just as stoutly Wait by the fifth aridBixth amend ments toithe Constitution no such military tr lbu nals can be established for the trial of any person not in the military or na*v*l rier-fWe of tbe United States, or in tbe ririhtia when Iri- actual service, for the commission ot any crime whatever in time of war or insurrection ? It ought to have occurred to the' gentleman wbeii com- men ting iipon;the exception in the fifth article of the Constitution, that there was a reason for it very diffe rent from that which he saw fit to assign,- and that reason, manifestly upon the face of Uhe Constitution itself, was, that by the-eighth section of tlife first article, it is:exp?e8$fly provided, that Congresssballlia'vepo-.ver to maikerules iorthegoverrimentofthelandand naval forces, and to provide tor. organizing,, arnams-, and Pis'- ciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States,-and that; Iri asmuch as military discipline and order arenas essentialiu au army in time of peace, as in time of war, if tbe Constitution would leave this power to*C0ngrese in peace.it must maKe the exception, so tbab rules and regulations for the government ot the army and navy should be-operative in time of peace as well as in time of war : because the provisions of the Constitution -give the right of -trial by jury In time of peace, irf all criminal prosecutions by. indictment, in terms unbracing every human being thacmay be held to answer lor crime in the-Uni'ted States; and therefore if the eighth section ofthe first article was to remain in full lorceiNTiM-KOF pbace, the exception must be made: aud accordingly* the exception was m'ade. But by the argument we have listened to. this court is told, and. ch'e country isto'ld. that in tiriie of war, a war which Involves in its-dread issue the lives and in terests of us all, the guaranties of the Constitution are1 Hi full iorue ior tbe benefit of those who conspire with the enemy; creep into your camps, murder fn cold blood, in the interests of Ute invader or insurgent, the commander-in-chief of your army, and secure to bin* the slow and weak provisions of the civil law, while tb£ soldier who maywben overcome by the demands' of exhausted nature, whicb caunor. be resisted, have Slepkat his post j is subject to be tried upon the spot by a military tribunal arid shot. Tbe argument amounts' to this:— Tbab as military courts and military trials of civilians in time of war are a usurpation jmd tyranny;. andasebldietesare liable to such arrests and trial, Ser1 geanbCorbett,:Who shot Booth, should be tried and executed by sentence of a military court, wliileBooth's! co'-eonspirators and aiders should be saved from any such lnnlgtiity as a military trial. I conlesa that I am1 too dull to comprehend the logic, the reason., or the sense of such a eohclusion. If there is any one enti tled- to this privilege of acivil trial, at a remote pe riod, and by a jury of the District, in time of civil war; ¦ when the foundations of the Republic are rocking beneath the earthquake tread off armed Rebellion, that riaan is* the • defender of the Republic. It vl-iU never do to say, as has been1 said in this argument, that the sOldler is not lia* ble to* be tried in tlm6.0fwar by a mhitarytribunal fbr any other offense than those prescribed "in the rules and articles of war. To my mind, nothing can bei clearer thau that citizen and soldier alike, in time bf civil br foreign war,' altera proclamation of martial! law. are triable by military tribunals for all offenses of which they may be guilty, in tbe interests of, or in concert with, the enemy; These provisions, therefore, of your Constitution ,for iridtctment and trial byjury in civil courts ot ailrrimes are, as I Shallhereafter Show, silent andinoperative in time of war when- the public saiety requires lb. Thearguhaentto which I have thus been replying, as. theCourt Will not fail toperceivej nor that public to Which the.argumesnt is addressed, -is- a labored attempt to establish the -proposition j that, by the Constitution oftheUriited States, the Annerican peop.e cannot, even iri a civil war the greatest the world has- ever seen', employ martial law and military tribunals as a means of successfully asserting their authority, pre-< serving their nationality, and securing protection to the lives and property of all, and especially t6 the per sons of those to whom Dhe^ have Committed* otficia'ly; the great trust on" maintaining the national authority. The gentleman Says', with an air of perfectcdnfideiiee, that he denies" the jurisdiction of 'military tribunals fbr the trial of civilians in time of war, because neither the Constitution nor laws justify,- but on the contrary repudiate them, and that all the experience of the pastis against it. I might content myself with saving that the practice of all nations is against the gentle man's conclusion: The straggle for our national in-' dependence was aided and prosecuted by military tri bunals and martial law, as well as by arms. The Con-1 test for American nationality began with the estab lishment, verysoon after thefiring of the first gun at Le^fagtott.OHtbeiOthdayof April, 1775, of military tribunals and martial law. Ontheitoth of June, 177S,* the - Continental . Congress provided that " whoso ever^ beldnginy to the continental army; shall be tion* Vi'cted of holding correspondence with) or giving intel ligence to the enetay, either indirectly Or directlyv shall (Suffer such punishment as by a coUrt-hnartial shall be1 ordered." This Was iburid not sufficientj inas- jaauch as itdid not reach those civilians whot likecer-' tairi civiliirisof riurday, claim the protection of the ci^il law in time of war against military arrests and military trials for military crimes. Therefore-, the same Congress, on the 7th of November, 1775. amended this provision by Striking but the words ••belonging to 180 TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT: WASHINGTON. the continental army," and adopting the article as for lows: — i . . '¦'All persons convicted of holding a treacherous cor respondence with , or'giying intelligence to the enemy, shall suffer death or such other punishment as a gene ral court-martial shall think proper." And on the 17th of June, 1776, the Congress added an additional rule— , , •'That all persons, not members of, nor owing alle giance to, any of the United States of America, who should be found lurking as spies in or about, the fortifi- pabions or encampments of the armies ofthe United States, or any of them, shall suffer death, according to the law and usage of nations, by the sentenpeof a court-martial, or such other punishment as a court- martial shall direct." Comprehensive as was this legislation, embracing as it did soldiers, citizens, and aliens, subjecting all alike tp trial ior their military crimes by the military tri-r bunais of justice, according to the law and the usage of nations, it was iouud to be insufficient to meet that most dangerous of allcrimes committed in tbe inter ests of the enemy by citizens in timoofwar, the crime of conspiring together to assassinate or seize and carry away the soldiers and citizens who were loyal to the cause of the country. Therefore, on the 27th of Febru ary, 1778, the Congress adopted the following resolu tion :— "Resolved, That whatever inhabitants of these-States shall kill, or seize, or take any loyal citizen or citizens thereof and convey bim, her, or them to anjr place within the power ofthe enemy, or shall enter into any combination for such purpose, or attempt to carry the same into execution, or hath assisted, or shall assist therein; or shall, by giving intelligence, acting as a guide, or in any manner whatever, aid the enemy in the perpetration thereof, he shall suffer death by the judgment ot a court-martial as a traitor, assassin, or spy, if the offense be committed within seventy miles of the head-quarters of the grand or other armies of these States where a general officer commands."— Journals of Congress, vol U, pp. 459, 460. . t ,,, So stood the law until the adeption f the Constitu tion of theUnited States. Every well informed man knows that at the time ofthe passage of these acts, the courts of Justice having cognizance of all crimes against persons, were open in many of the States, and that by their several constitutions and charters, which were then tbe supreme law fbr the punishment of crimes committed within their respective territorial limits, no man was liable to conviction but by the ver dict ofa jury. Take, for example, tbe provisions of the Constitution of North Carolina, adopted on the 10th of November, 1776, and infull force at the timeof the passage of the last resolution by Congress, above cited, which provisions are as follows :— "That no ireeman shall be put to answer any crlmi rial charge but by indictment, presentment or im peachment." "That no freeman shall be convicted of any crime' but by the unanimous verdict of a jury of good and lawful men m open court, as heretofore used." This was the law in 177S in all theStates, and the pro- Vision ior atrial by jury every one knows meant a jury of twelve men.empauneled and qualified to try the issue in a civil court. The conclusion is not to be avoided, that these enactments of the Congress under the Con federation set aside tbe trial by jury within the several States, and expressly provided for. tbe trial by court- martial of -'any of tbe inhabitants" who, during tlie revolution, might, contrary to the provisions of said law, and in aid ofthe public enemy, g4ve them intelli gence, or kill any loyal citizens of the united States, or enter into any combination to kill orcarry them away. How comes it. if the argument of the counsel be true, that this enactment was passed by the Congress of 1778, when tbe constitutions of the several States at tbat day as fully guarantied trial by jury to everv person held to answer for a crime, as does the Con stitution of the Unit d States at this hour? Notwithstanding this fact. I have yet to learn that any loyal man ever challenged, during all tbe period of our conflict for independence and nationality, the validity ofthat law for the trial, for military offenses, by military tribunals, of all offenders, as the law, notoi peace, but of war, and absolutely essential to theprose- cution of war. I may be pardoned for saying tbat it Is tbe accepted common law of nations, that mar tial-law Is, at all times and every where, essential to tbe successful prosecution of war, whether It be a civil or a foreign war. The validity of these acts ofthe Con tinental and Confederate Congress I know was chal lenged, but only by men charged with the guilt of their country's blood. w ashlngton, the peerless, the stainless, and the just, with whom God walked through the night of thai- great trial, enforced this Just and wise enactment upon all occasions. On the 30th of September, 1 7*0. Joshua II. Smith, by the order of General Washington . was put upon his trial before < a court-martial, convened in the State of New York, on the charge of tbqre,aidlng,and assisting Benedict Arnold. In a combination with the enemy, to .take, kill, and seize such loyal citizens or soldiers of the United states as were In garrison at WestPolnt. smith objected to tbe Jurisdiction, aver ring that hewas a private citizen, not in the military or naval service, and therefore was only amenable to the civil authority of the State„.wbose Constitution bad guarantied the right of trial by Jury to all persons held to answer for crime. (Chandler's Criminal Trials, vol. 2, p. 187). The Constitution of New York then in force baq so provided; but, notwithstanding that, the Court overruled the plea, held bim to answer, and tried him. I repeat that, when Smith was thus tried by court- martial, the Constitution of New York as fully guaran tied trial by jury in the civil courts to all civilians charged and held to answer for crimes within toe limits of tbat State, as dees the Constitution, of tbe United States guarantee such trial within the limits of the District of Columbia. By tbe second of the Articles of Con federation each State retained<"Its sovereignty,-? and every power. Jurisdiction and right not expressly delegated to tbe United States in Congress assembled; By those articles there was no express delegation of j udicial power; therefore the States retained it 1 uily. If tbe military courts constituted by the commander ofthe army of the United States under the Confedera tion, who was appointed only by a resolution of the Congress, without &ny express grant of power to au thorize it, bin office not being created by tbe act of the people in (heir fundamental law, had jurisdiction iu every State to try and put to death "any inhabitant" thereof who should kill any loyal citizen or enter into "any combination" for any such purpose therein in time of war, notwithstanding the provisions oi' the constitution and laws of such States, how can any man conceive., that, under the Constitution ofthe United States, which Is the supreme law over every State, anything in the constitution and laws of such State* to tbe contrary notwithstanding, and the su preme law over every Territory of tbe republic as well, the Commander-in-Chief of the army, of the United States, who is made such by the Constitution, and by Its supreme authority clothed witb the power and charged with the duty of directing and controlling the whole military power of theUnited States in time of rebellion or invasion, has not that authority? I need not remind the Court tbat one of the marked differences between the Articles, of Confederation and the Constitution of tbe United States was, that under the Confederation the Congress was the sole de pository of all Federal power. ' The Congress of the Confederation, said Madison held "the command of the army." (Fed., No. 38). Has the Constitution, which was ordained by the people the better "to insure do mestic tranquility and to provide for tbe common de- lense," so fettered' the, .great power of seh'-de ense against armed insurrection or invasion that martial law, so essential in war, Is forbidden by that great in strument? I will yield to no man in reverence lor or obedience to the Constitution of my country, esteem ing it, as I do, a new evangel to tbe nations, embodying the democracy of the New Testament, tbe absolute equality of all men before tbe law, in respect of those rights of human nature which are the gi it of God. and there. ore as universal as the material structure of num. Can it be that this Constitution of ours, so divine in its spirit of justice, so beneficent In its results, so full of wisdom and goodness and truth, under which we be- came -one people, a great and powerful nationality, has in terms, or by implication, denied to this people the power, to crush armed rebellion by war, and to arrest and punish, during ihe existence of such rebellion, according to the laws of war and the usages of nations, secret conspirators, who aid and abet tbe public enemy? , . Here is a conspiracy,. organized and prosecuted by armed traitors and hired assassins, receiving the moral support of thousands in everv State and district, who pronounced the war lor the. Union a failure, and your now murdered but immor tal Commander-in-Chief, a tyrant; the object of which conspiracy, as the testimony shows, was to aid tbe tottering Rebellion which, struck at the nation's lite. It is in evidence tbat Davis, Thompson, and others, chiefs in this Rebellion, in, aid of thesame, agreed and conspired-with others to poison tbe foun tains of water whidn supply your commercial metro polis, and thereby murder its inhabitants; to secretly deposit in the habitations of the people and in the ships in your harbors imiammable materials, and thereby destroy them by fire: to murder by the slow and con suming torture of (amine your soldiers, captive iu their bands; to import pestilence in. infected clothes tobe distributed in your capital and camps, and thereby murder, tbe surviving heroes aud defenders of the Republic, who, standing by the holy graves of your unreturning brave, proudly and deiian.lv challenge to honorable combat and open battle all public enemies* that, their country may live; and, finally, to crown this horrid catalogue of crime, this sum of all human atro cities,, conspired, as charged upon your record, with the accused and John Wilkes Booth and John H. Sur ratt, to kill and murder in your capital the executive officers of your Government and the commander ol your armies. When this conspiracy, entered into by these traitore, is revealed. by its . attempted execution, and the foul and brutal murder oi your President iu Hit* capital, you are told that it is unconstitutional,. In order to arrest the further execution of the con spiracy, to interpose the military power of this Gov ernment for the arrest, without civil process, of any of TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 181 the parties thereto and for their trial by a military tri bunal ot justice. If any such rule bad obtained during our struggle for in dependence, we never would have been a nation. If any such rule bad been adopted and acted Qi.onnow, during the fierce struggle of tbe past four years, no man can say tbat our nationality would have thus long survived. The whole people of bhe United States, by their Con stitution, have created the office of President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the Army and N avy, and have vested, by the terms ot'that Con stitution, in ihe person of the President and Com mander-in-Chief, the power to enforce, the execution ofthe laws, and preserve, protect and defend the Con stitution. Thequestion may well be asked, If, as Commander- in-Chief, the President may not, in time of insurrec tion or war. proclaim and execute martial law, ac cording to tne usages of nations, how he can success fully per orm the duties of his office— execute the laws, preserve the constitution, suppress insurrection, and repel invasion? Marti&llaw and military tribunals are as essential to tue successful prosecuLion of war, as are men, and arms, and munitions. The Constitution of the United States has vested the nower to declare war and raise armies and navies exclusively in tbe Congress, and the power to prosecute the war and command the army and navy exclusively iu the President ot theUnited Slates. Asunder the Coulederation, the commander of the army, appointed only by the Congress, was by the resolution ofthat Congress empowered to act as he might think proper for the good and welfare of the ser vice; subject only to such restraints or orders as tbe Congress might give; so, under tbe Constitution, the President is, by the people who ordained that Consti tution and declared him Commander-in-chief of tbe army and navy, vested witb full power to direct and control the army aud navy of the United Slates, and employ all tbe forces necessary to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and execute the laws, as enjoined by bis oath and the very letter of the Consti tution, subject to no restriction or direction save such as Congress may lrom tune . o time prescribe. That these powers for tbe common deiense, intrusted by the Constitution exclusively to the Congress and the President, are, in time of civil war or foreign invasion, to beexercised without limitation or restraint, tothe exteut of the public necessity, and without any inter vention of tbe Federal judiciary or of State constitu tions or State laws, are facts incur history not open to question. Tne position is not to be answered by saying you . make the American Congress thereby omnipotent, and clothe the American Executive with the asserted ab- tribute or hereditary monarchy— tbe king can do no wrong. Let the position be iairly stated— that the Con gress and President, in war as in peace, are hut the agentsipf tbe whole people, and that this unlimited power Tor the.common deiense against arm-.-d rebellion or foreign invasion is but the power of the people in trusted exclusively to the legislative and executive de-,' partments as their agents, for any and every abuse of Which, these agents are directly responsible to the peo ple: and the demagogue cry of an omnipotent Congress and an Executive invested with r.-yal prerogatives, vanishes like the baseless fabric of a vision. If tbe Congress, corruptly or oppressively or wantonly abuse this great trust, the people by the irresistible power of tlie ballot burl tbem lrom place. If the President so abuse the trust, the people by their Congress withhold supplies, or by impeachment transfer tbe trust to bet ter bands, strip him ot the franchises of citizenship and of office, and declare him forever disqualified to hold any position of honor, trust or power under tbe Gov ernment of his country. I can understand very well why men should tremble at the exercise of this great power by a monarch whose person, by tbe constitution of his realm, is inviolable, but I cannot conceive how any American citizen, who has faith in tbe capacity ofthe whole people to govern themselves, should give himself any concern on the subject. Mr.Kallam, the distinguished author ot the ConstitutionaTHistory of England, has said:— "Kings love to display the divinity with which their flatterers invest them in nothing so much as in the in stantaneous execution of their will, and to stand re vealed, as it were, in the storm and thunderbolt when their power breaks through the operation ot secondary causes and awes a prostrate nation without the inter vention of law." . ,. , How just are such words when applied to an irre sponsible monarch! bow absurd when applied to a whole people, acting .through tbeir duly appointed agents whose will, thus declared, is the supreme law, to awe into submission and peace and obedience, not a prostrate nation, but a prostrate rebellion! The same great author utters tbe fact which all history attests, . "It has been usual for all Governments during actual Rebellion to proclaim martial law tor the suspension bf civil iurisdictioii; and this anomaly, I must admit," he adds "is very far" from being less indispensable at such unhappy seasons where the ordinary mode of trial is bv jury than where the right of decision re sides in the eourt."-tt»w*. Hi*t.% vol. i, cb. 5, p. 32fi. That the power to proclaim martial law arid fully or r*artia".y suspend the civil Jurisdiction, Federal and State, iu time of Rebellion or civil war, and punish by military tribunals all offenses committed in aid of tha public enemy. Is conferred upon Congress aud the Exe cutive, necessarily results from the unlimited grants of power for the common defense to which 1 have already briefly referred. I may be pardoned for say ing that this position is not assumed by riae for the purposes of this occasion, but that early in the first year of this great struggle for our national life I pro claimed it as a representative of tbe people, under the obligation of my oath, and as I then believed, and still believe, upon the authority of the great men who formed and fashioned bhe wise and majestic fabric of American Government. Some of the citations which I deemed it my duty at that time to make, and some of which I now repro duce, have, I am pleased bo say, found a wider circula tion in books that have since been published by others. When the Constitution was On trial for Its' deliver ance before the people ofthe several States, its ratifi cation was opposed on the ground tbat it conferred upon Congress and the Executive unlimited power for the common defense. To all such objectors, aud they1 were numerous In every State, that great man, Alex ander Hamilton, whose words will live as long as our language lives, speaking to tbe listening people of all the States and urging them not to reject tbat matchless instrument which bore tbe name of Washington. said: — "Tbe authorities essential to the care ofthe common defense are these — To raise armies: to build and equip fleets; to prescribe rule3 for the government of both; to direct their operations: to provide fur their support. These powers ought to exist without limitation-; because it is impossible to foresee or define the extent and variety of national exigencies, and the corres- Eondent extent and variety of the means which may e necessary to satisfy them. "The circumstances that endanger the safety of na tions are infinite, and for this reason no constitutional shackles can wisely be imposed on the power to which the care of it is committed. * * * This power ought to be under the direction ofthe same councils which are appointed to pfeside over the common de fense. * * * It must be admitted, as a necessary consequence, tbat there can be no limitation of that authority, which is to provide for the deiense and pro tection of the community, in any -manner essential to its efficacy; that is, in any manner essential to the for mation, direction, or support ot tbe national forces." He adds tbe further remark:— "This is one of those truths which, to acorrect and unprejudiPed mind, car ries its own evidence along with it, and may be ob scured, but cannot be made plainer by- argument or reasoning. It rests upon axioms as simple as they are universal the means ought to be proportioned -to the end; the persons from whose agency the attainment of any end is expecred ought to possess- the' means by which it is tb be attained."— Federalist, No. 23. In the same great contest for the adoption of the Constitution Madison, sometimes called the Father of theOonstitutlon.said:— "Is the power of declaring waf necessary? No man will'answer this question in tbe negative. * * * Is the power of raising armies and equipping fleets ne cessary? * * * It is involved in the power of self-defense. * * * Witb wbat color of pro priety could tbe force necessary for defense be limited by those who cannot limit the force of offense. * * The means of security can only be regulated by the means and the danger ot attack. * * * It Is in vain to oppose constitutional barriers tothe impulse of self-preservation.- It is worse than in vain, because it plants in the Constitution itself necessary usurpa tions of power."— Federalist, No. 41. With this construction proclaimed both by tbe advo cates and opponents ol its ratification, the Constitution of the United States was accepted and adopted, and that construction has been followed, and acted upbn by every department of the Government to this day. It was as well understood then In theory as it has since been illustrated in practice, that the judicial power, both Federafand State, had no voice and could exercise no authority in the conduct and prosecution of a war, except in subordination to the political de partment of the Government. Tbe Constitution con tains the significant provision, "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or- Invasion the public safety may require it. k What was this but a declaration that in time of re bellion or invasion, the public safety is the highest law? that so far as necessary the civil courts (bf which the Commander-in-CMer. under the direction of Congress, shall be the sole judge) must be silent, and the rights of each citizen, as secured in time of peace', must yield to the wants, interests, and necessities of tbe nation? Yet we have been gravely told by the gentleman, in his argument, that the maxi m stilus populi suprcmaest lexf is but fit for a tyrant's use. Those grand men, whom God taught to build fabric of empire, thought other wise when they put tbat maxim into the Constitution of their country. It Is very clear that the Constitution recognizes tbe great principle wbicb underlies tbe 182 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. structure of society and pf. all civil government, tbat no man lives for himself alone, but each for alii tbat. If need be, some must die, that the State may live, because at best the individual is-but for to-day, while the commonwealth is fox all time, I agree with tihe gentleman, in the maxim which be borrows from Aristotle, 'Let the public weal be urider the protection of the law;*' but I claim that in war, as in- peace, by the very terms pf the Constitution of the. country-, the public safety is under the protection of the law; that the Constitution itself has provided for the decla ration of war for tbe common defense, lo suppress re bellion, to repel invasion,- and, by express terms, has declared that whatever Is necessary to make the prose cution of the war successful-, may be done, and ought to be dorie. afid is therefore constitutionally lawful. Who will dpre; to say that in time of civil war "no person shall- be deprived of llle, liberty, and property. ¦v^ithontdue process of law?" This is a provision of your Constitution than which there is none more just or sacred in it; it is, however,, only tbe law of peace. not of war. In peace, that wise provision of the Con stitution must be, and, is, enforced by the civil courts} iu war, it must be. and i-g.to a great ex tent, inoperative and disregarded. The thousands slain by your armies in battle were deprived of life "without due process of law." All spies arreted, convicted and executed by your military tribunals in ti-meof war, are deprived of liberty and life "without duo process of law;" all ene mies eaptuj-pd and, held as prisoners of war are de prived of liberty "without due process of law;" all pwners whose property is forcibly seized and appro- Sriated in war are deprived of their property "without ue process of law.'* .The Constitution recognizes tho -principle of common law, that every man's house is his castle; that Ins home, the shelter of bis wii'e and child- fen, is his most, sacred possession; and has therefore specially provided, "that.no soldier shall inUmeaf peace bespattered, in, any bouse without the consent of its owner, nor in time of, war^ but in a manner to be prescribed by. law (£11. Amendment), thereby de claring that in time of war Congress may by law authorize, as ifc has done, that without the consent and against the' consent ol' theowner, thejsoldier may be quartered in any man's bouse, and upon any man's hearth. Whatlbave said Hlustrates- the proposition, that in time, of war the civil tribunals of justice are Wholly or partially silent, ,as the public safety may re quire; that the limitations and provisions oi'the Con stitution in lavor of life, liberty and property are*there- fore whply or partially -suspeuded. In this I.am sus tained by an authority second to norie with intelligent American citizens. Mi. John Quincy Adams than Whomapurer man or a; wiser statesman never as cended the chair of the chief magistracy in, America? said in his place in the House of Representatives, in to, that;— , "In the authority given to Congress by the Constitu tion ofthe Un-ted States to declare war, ail the powers Ipcident to wa/ are by necessary implication conferred upon the Government of the UnitedStates. Nuwthe ppwers incidental to- war are derived, not from their fpternal municipal source, but. from the laws and usages of nations. Thereare, then, in the authority of Congress arid of the Executive two classes ©f powers altogether different in their nature and often incom patible with each other, tbe warpower.and.ihepeace power. . The A peace, power is limited by regula tions , and restricted by provisions prescribed within the Constitution itself* The war power is limited only by the laws and usage of nations. This power is treniend, us; it is strictly constitutional, but it breaks flown every barrier sp anxiously erected for the pro tection otliberty, ofproperty, and nf life." , If this be so. bow can there pe trial by jury for ;,milltary offenses , jn time ,of\ civil war? If you' canriot, and do not, try the armed enemy before you shoot hhnjorthe captured enemy before you im prison hiin* why should you be held to open the civil courts and" try tbe spy, the conspirator, and the assassin, in the secrpt service of the poblie ene- iriy. byjary, before you. convict and punish him? Why not clanapr against holding imprisoned the paptrired armed Rebels, deprived 01 their liberty with out due projess of law? Are they tnot citizens? - Why pot clamor against slaying for their crime of treason, which is cogniaaiuPjir the civil courts, by your rifled .ordnance and the iron hail of your mus'Uetry In battle^ ,thes,e public enemies, without trial by/jury? ..Ajre they not citizens? Why is the ciamor confined exclusively Jo.the trial by xqJtilftiiy tribunals of justice oftrnitorous spies, traitorous conspirators and assassins hired to do sficrf tly what the armed Bebel, at tempts to do opeulv, -murder yovr nationality by assassinating its defenders .andiLs executive ouleprs? Nothing, can, be clearer than tbat tlit Rebel captured prisoner, being a citizen pf the repubilc-t is as much entitled to trial by jury before he is Committed to prison as the spy, or the aider and abetter of the treason by conspiracy and assassination. bein.T a ettteen. \& entitled to such trial by jury beiore he i& subjected to the Just punishment' of the law ior hisgi eat crime. I think, that in time of war the "remark of Montesqpleuvtouching the civil Judiciary, is tuue, that ,'Mt Is next tp notblngi" Hamil ton well said, " The Executive holds the sword of the community: the Judiciary has no direction of the strength of society; It has neither force nor Willi It bai judgment alone; and iri dependent? for- the execution of that upon the arm o^f the Executive.'' The people of these States so understood the Constitution1, and adopted it. and intended thereby, without limitation or restraint, to empower their-Congress and Executive to authorize by law, and exectate by ftfrce, whateve? the public' safety might require to suppress rebellion1 or regeMnvasiOMi '» ¦ - ' * ' Notwith&tarriidfeig all that has been-saidby the coun sel Jor the accused to the' contrary the Constitution5 has received this construction from thedayof its adop^ tion tcthlS'heur. The supreme Court of theUnited States has solemnly- decided that tbe.:Gott«titutfon has conlerred upon the Government authority to'employ* all the means necessary bathetfalthful ex-ecution of au the powers which that- 'Constitution enjoins* upon the Government of the United States, and upon evei*y dej partmetit and every officer thereof. Speaking of that provision of the Constitution which provides thafr "Congress shall h-aVie* power to make all laws that may be necessary and proper to carry .into effect all powers- granted tothe CJoVfemmterit- of tbe UniDed^taiies, or to any department or officer thereof/' Chief Justice1 Marshal], to bis great decision In. the case of McCul- loch vs.&tateof Maryland, says:— "The power's .given to the Government imply th* ordinary means of execution, and ihe Government, in* allsoued reason and fair interpretation, must have1 the choice ofthe means which 'it deems the most con venient and appropriate to tne- execution of the power, * * * The powers of the Government Were given- foe the welfare of'the nation; tbey were Intended to en-^ dure for ages to come, and- to be adapted' to the various crises in human affairs. -To preacrihe tbe specific' means bywhich Government should, in all mture1 time, execute its power.' arid to coftiine the choice of means to -such narrow' limits as shotfldanot leave it In* tJbejpower of Congress to adopt any which might W appropriate and conducive to the end, would be most unwise and pernicious*" (4 Wheaton. 420.) Words fitly spoken! which illustrated at the time of their utterance the wisdom of the Constitution in pro viding this general grant of power to meet every pps^- sible exigency which the fortunes of war might cast uport the/country , and the wisdom- of which wdrds, in turn, has been illustrated to'-day-by tbe gigantic and: triumphant struggle of tbe people during the lsfct four years ior the supremacy of the Constitution, and in exact accordance with its provisions^ In the light of these wonderful events the -words of Piiickoey, ut tered when the illustrious Chief Justice had concluded1 tbisropiriion, "The Constitution of my country is im mortal!'' .seem to_ have become words of prophecyi Has not this great tribunal, through the chief of all its judges, by this luminous and pro round reasoning, de clared that the Government may by law authorize the Executive to employ,- in the prosecution of war, tho ordinary means, and! all the means necessa&v and adapted to the end? And in tbe other decision: beiore referred to. in the sthofcranch, arising during the late war with Great Britain, Mr. Justice Wtory said:— " When the legislative authority, to whom the right to declare war is confided, -has declared war in its most unlimited, mam>ner, the executive authority, to whom the expectation of the war is confided, is bound to carry it into etfect.wHehas a discretion vested.in him as to the manner and extent, but he cannot-lawfully transcend the rules of warfare- established among civilized nations. He cannot-lawfully exercise powers-1 Or authorize proceedings which tne civilized world rei* pudiates and disclaims. The sovereignty, as to declar ing war and limiting its efiects, rests with tbe legisla-1 tore. Th.' sovereignty as to its execution rests with the President." (Brown vs. United States, 8 Cranchi 153.) Has the.Gorigressi to wlibna Is- committed the sove reignty of the whole peopletodeclare war, by legisla tion restricted thePresident. or attempted to restrict him in tho prosecution of tbis War for the Union from exercising all the "powers" and adopting all the "pro ceedings" usually approved and emploved by tho civiliaed world? Hewotild, in myjudgnlbrit, beabo'd man wlifl asserted that Congress has so legislated; and the Congress which should by law fetter the executive arm when raised lor the common deense would.iH my opinion- hi* false to their oath. That Congress may prescribe rules, for the Government ofthe army and navy and the militia when in nctiial service, by arti cles o I war,ks an express1 gran* of oower inthe Con stitution, which Congress .has rightfully exercised* anoT w.ilcb the Execntiveimust arid aoesobey. That Con- fress mdy aid the Executive by- legislation Inthe pros- cutioo of a war, civil or foreign, is admitted. Thai* Congress may restrain the Executive, and arraign, try and condemn bim fbr Wantonly abusing the grear trusts is eipressiy declared inthe Constitution. That Congress stotM pass all laws uectewtvry to enable tbe Executive to execute the laws of the Union. Suppress ihstvrrection and repel invasion, ie one ot trie express requirements of the constitution, fbr the performancei 01 -whicb tbe Congress is bound by an oatB: ¦ % What was the legislation of Congress When treason fired its first gun on Sumter? Bv the act of 1705. 1t i-j provided that whenever the laws of theUnired state** shall be opposed; or the execution fberep-1 obstructed TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 13 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS' AT WASHINGTON. 183 in any State by combinations too powerfhl to be sup pressed by the ordinary course of Judicial proceeding, Or by the powers vested in the marsbals.it shall be lawful by this act for tbe President to call forth the iriliiiaofsuch State, or of any other State or States, as may be necessary to suppress such combinations and to cause the laws to be executed. (1st Statutes at Large. 424.) By the act of 18J7 it is provided that in case of insurrection or obstruction to the laws, either oftheUnited States or of any individual State or Ter ritory, where it is lawipr for the President of tbe United States to call forth the militia for'the purpose of suppressing such insurrection, or of causing the laws to be duly executed, lt-shailbelawful for him to employ for such puroosesuch part of the land or naval forces of tbe Unitedstates as shall be judged necessary. (2d Statutes at Large. 443.) Can any one doubt that by these acts the President is clothed with lull powertodetermine whether armed in surrection exists in any State or Territory of theUnion, and if so. to make war upon it with all tbe force he may deem necessary or be able to command? By the simple exerciseof this great power it necessarily results that he may, in the prosecution ot the war for the sup pression of such insurrectiontSLispend, as far as may be necessary, the civil administration ofjustice by sub stituting in its stead martial law, which is simply the common law of war. If, in such a moment, the President may make no arrests without civil warraut, and may inflict no violence or pe nalties on persons (as is claimed here for the accused), without flrst obtaining the verdict of juries and tne judgment of civil courts, then is this legislation a mockery, and the Constitution, which not only authorized but enjoined its enactment, but a glittering generality aud a splendid bauble. Happily the Supreme Court has settled all controversy on this ouestijn. In speaking of the Rhode Island insurrec tion, the court 3ay:— "The Constitution of theUnited States, as far as it has provided for an emergency of this kind and au thorized the general Government to interfere in the domestic concerns of a State, has treated the subject as political m its nature and placed the power in the bands of that department." * * * * '¦By the act of-1795. the power oF deciding whether the exigency has arisen upon which the Government of the United States is bound to interfere, is given to the President." The court add:— "When the President has acted and called out the militia, is a Circuit Court ot the United States author ized to inquire whether his decision was right? It it could, then it would become the duty or tbe court, pro vided it came to the conclusion that the President har- decidcd incorrectly, to discharge those who were ad- rested or detained by tne troops in the service ofthe United States." * * * '"It the judicial power extends so far, the guarantee contained in tbe Constitution of the United States is a guarantee of an archy and not of order " * * * "Yet If this right does notreside in the courts when the con flict is raging, if the judicial power is at that time bound to follow the decision of the political, it must be equally bound when the contest Is over. It cannot, when peace is restored, punish as offenses and crimes the acts which it before recognized and was bound to recognize as lawful." Luther vs. Borden, 7 Howard, 42, 43. If this be law, what becomes of the volunteer advice of the volunteer counsel, bv him given withouttmoney and without price, to this Court, of their responsibility, their per^onai responsibility, for obeying tbe orders of the President of the United States in trying persons accused of the murder of the chief naagistrate and commander-in-c'n.'ef of the army and navy of the United States in time of Rebellion, and in pursuance of a conspiracy entered into with the public enemy? I may be pardoned for asking the attention ofthe Court to a further citation from this important deci sion, in which the Court say, the employment of mili tary powerto put down au armed Insurrection "is es sential to tho existence of every Government, and is as necessary to the States oi this Union as to any other Government, and it tbe Government of theState deem the armed opposition so formidable as to require the use of military force and the declaration of martial law, we see no ground upon which this Court cao question its authority."— Ibid. This decision in terms declared tbat under the act of 1795 the President had power to decide and decided the question so as to ex clude further Inquiry whether the State Government which ttlus employed force and proclaimed. martial law was the Government of the State, and there-ore was Hlrmitted to act. If a State may do this, to putaown armed insurrection, may not the Federal Government as well? The reason of the man who doubts it may justly be questioned. I but quote the language of that tribunal, in another case before cited, wuen I say the Constitution confers 'upon the President the whole executive power. We have seen that tbe proclamation of blockade made by the President was affirmed by the Supreme Court as a lawful and valid act, although its direct effect was to dispose of the property of Whoever vio lated it, whether citizen or stranger. It is dimcult bo I perceive what course of reasoning can be adopted, in the light of that decision, which will justify any man in saying tbat tlie President had not the like power to proclaim martial law in time of insurrection against theUnited States, and to establish, according to tbe customs of war among civilized nations, militarv tri bunals of justice for its enforcement, and fbr the punish ment of all crimes committed In the interests of the public enemy. These acts of the President bave, however, all been legalized by the subsequent legislation of Congress, al though the Supreme Court decided, in relation to the proclamation of blockade, that no such legislation was necessary. By the act of August 6th, 1861, ch. 03, section 3, it is enacted that— "All theacts, proclamations and orders of thePresi dent ofthe United States, after the 4th ot March, 1861, respecting tbe army and navy oftheUnited States, and calling out, or relating to the militia or volunteers from the States, are hereby approved in all respects, legalized and made valid to the same extent, and witb the same effect as if they had been issued and done under the previous express authority and direction of the Congress ot the United States."— (12 Stat, at Large, 326.) This act legalized, if any such legalization was neces sary, all that the President bad done from the day of his inauguration to that hour, in the prosecution ofthe war for tbe Union. He had suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and resisted its execution when issued by tbe Chief Justice of the United States; he bad called out and accepted the services of a large body of volunteers for a period not previously author ized by law; he had declared a blockade of the South ern ports; he had declared the Southern States In in surrection! hehad ordered the armies to Invade them and suppress it; thus exercising, in accordance witb the laws of war, power over the life, the liberty, and the property ot the citizens. Congress ratified it and affirmed it. In like manner and by subsequent legislation did the Congress ratify and affirm tbe proclamation ot mar tial law otSeptember 25, 1862. That proclamation, as the Court will bave observed, declares that during the existing insurrection all Rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors within the United States, and all pei sons guilty of any disloyal practice affording aid and comfort to the Rebels against the authority of tbe United States, shall be subject to martial law and lia ble to triaUand punishment by courts-martial or mili tary commission; and second, that the writ of habeas corpus is suspended in respect to all persons arrested, or who are now or hereafter during theRebellion shall be imprisoned in any fort, &c. by any military autho rity, or by the sentence of any court-martial or mili tary commission. One would suppose that it needed no argument to satisfy an intelligent and patriotic citizen of the United States that, by the ruling ofthe Supreme Court cited. so much of this proclamation as declares that all rebels and Insurgents, their aiders and abettors, shall be subject to martial law, and be liable to trial and punishment by court-martial or military commission, needed po ratification by Congress. Every step that tbe President took against rebels and insurgents was taken in pursuance of the rules of war and was an ex ercise of martial law. Who says that he should not deprive them, by the authority of this law, of life and liberty? Are the aiders and abettors of these insur gents entitled to any higher consideration than the armed insurgents themselves? It is against these that the President proclaimed martial law, and against all others who were guilty of any disloyal practice afford ing aid and comfort to rebels against the authority of the United States. Against these heisuspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; and these, and onlysuch as these, were by that proclamation subjected to trial and punishment by court-martial or military commission. That the Proclamation covers the offense charged here, no man will, or dare, for amoment deny. Was It not a disloyal practice? Was it not aiding and abetti ng the insurgents and Rebels to enter into a conspiracy with them to kill and murder, within your Capital and your intrenched camp, the Commauder-in- Chief of our army, your Lieu ten ant-General, and tbe Vice Presi dent, and the Secretary of State, with intent thereby to atd tbe Rebellion, and to subvert the Constitution and laws of tbe United States? But it is said that tbe President could notestablish a court for their trial, and therefore Congress must ratify and affirm this Procla mation. I have said before that such an argument comes with ill grace from the lips ot him who declared as solemnly that neither by the Congress nor-by the President, could either the Rebel himself or his aider or abettor be lawfully and constitutionally subjected to trial by any military tribunal, whether court-martial ormilitary commission; but the Congress did ratify, in the exercise of the power vested in them, every part of this Proclamation. I have said, upon the authority ofthe fathers ofthe Constitution, and of its judicial in terpreters, that Congress has power by legislation to aidthe Executive in the suppression of rebellion, in executing the laws of tbe Union when resisted by armed insurrection, and in repelling invasion. By the act of March 8, 1863, the Congress of the 184 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON". United States, by the flrst section thereof declared that during tbe present Rebellion the President of the United States, whenever in his judgment the public safety may require it. is authorized to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in any case throughout tpe United States or any part thereof. By the fourth section of thesame act it is declared that any order of the Presi dent, or under his authprity, made at any time durin , tbe existence ot tbe present Rebellion, shall be a de fense in all courts to any action or prosecution, civil or criminal, pending or to be commenced, for any search, seizure, arrest or imprisonment made, done or com mitted, or acts omitted to be done, under and by virtue, of such order. By the fifth section it is provided that if any suit or prosecution, civil or criminal, has been or shall be commenced in any State Court against any officer, civil or military, or against any other per son, for any arrest or, imprisonment'made or other trespasses or wrongs done or committed, or any act omitted to be done at any time during tbe preseut,Re- pellion, by virtue of or under color of any authority derived from or exercised by or under the President of theUnited States, if the defendant shall, upon ap pearance in such Court, file a petition stating the facts uoon'aflidavit, &c, as aforesaid, for the removal ofthe cause for trial tothe Circuit Court of the United States, itshall bethedutyof the State-Court, upon hisgiving security, to proceed no further in the pause or prosecu tion. Thus declaring that all orders ofthe President made at any time during the existence of the present Rebellion and all acts done in pursuance thereof, shall be beld valjd in the courts of justice. Without further inquiry, these provisions of this statute embrace Order No. 141, which is the proclamation of martial' law, and necessarily legalize every act done under it, either be- fore the passage of theactof i$G3 or since. Inasmuch as that proclamation ordered that all rebels, insur gents, their aiders and abettors and persons guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid and comfort to rebels against the authority ofthe United States at any time during the existing insurrection should be subject to martial law and liable to trial and punishment by a military commission, the sections of the law just cited declaring lawful all acts done in pursuance of such order, including of course the trial and punishment by military commission of all such offenders as directly legalized this order of the President as ,it is possible ifor Congress to legalize or authorize any executive act whatever. 12 Stat, at Barge, 755-6. ¦ But after assuming and declaring with great earnest ness in his argument, that no person .could be tried and ponvicted for such orimes by any military tribunal, whether a court-martial or a military commission, save those in the land or naval service in time of war, the gentleman makes the extraordinary statement that the creation ofa military commission must be authorized by the legislative department, and de mands, If there be any such legislation, "let the sta tute be produced." The -statute has been produced. Tbenower so to try, says the gentleman, musv.be au thorized by Congress, when the demand is; made for •such authority. Does not the gentleman thereby give up his argument; and admit that, -if the Congress has eo authorized the trial of all aiders and abettors of rebels or insurgents, for whatever they do in aid of euch rebels and iusurgentz, during the insurrection, ,that the statute and. proceedings under it are lawful Snd valid? I have, already shown that the Congress ave so legislated, by expressly legalizing order No. ill. which directed the trial of all Rebels, their aiders .and abettors, by military commission. Did not Con gress expressly legalize this, order, by declaring that the order shall be a deiense in all courts, to auy action or prosecution, civil oi criminal, for acts done in pur suance ofit? No amount of argument could make this point clearer than the language, of the statute itself. Eut, says the gentleman, if there be a statute author izing trials by military commission, " Let ib be pro duced." By the act of March 3, 1863, it Is provided in section tliirty that in time of war, insurrection or rebellion, murder and assault witb intent to kill, &g., when committed by persons in the military service, shall be punishable by tbe sentence of a court-martial or military commission, and the punishment of such of fenses shall never he less than those inflicted by the iaws of the State or District in "which tbey have >een committed. By the thirty-efghth section of the same act it is provided that all persons who in time of war or rebellion againsb the .United States, shall be found lurking or acting as spies in, or about the camps, &c, ofthe United States, or elsewhere, shall bo.triable by a military com- ajiisstou. apd-shall, unon couvictiou. suffpr death. Here1 is a statu Le which expressly declares that all persons, whether citizens or strangers, who in timo of rebellion shall be found acting as spies shall suffer death upon convictlpn by a military commission. Why did not thegentleman give lissome argument upon this Jaw? We have seen that tb was tbe existing law of the United States under bhe Confederation. Then and since -men not in tbe land or naval , forces ofthe United States bave suffered death for this offense upon con viction by courts-martial. If it was competent for Congress to authorize their trial by courts-martial, it wan equally competent for Congress to authorise their trial by military commission, and accordingly tbey have done so. By the same authority tbe Congress may extend the jurisdiction of military commissions over all military offenses or crimes committed in time of rebellion or war in aid ofthe public. enemy;, and It certainly stands with right reason that if it were just bo subject to death by the sentence of a military commission all persons who should be guilty merely oflurkingas spies inthe interests of the public enemy in time of rebellion, though tbey obtained no inform ation, though they inflicted no personal injury, but were simply overtaken and detected m the endeavor to obtain intelligence for the enemy, those .who enter into conspiracy with the enemy, not only to lurk as spies inyour camp, but to lurk there as murderers and assassins, and who, in pursuance of tbat conspiracy, commit assassination and murder upon the Com mander-in-Chief of your army, within your camp, and in aid of rebellion, should be subject in like manner to trial by military commission.— Stat, at Large. 12,736-7, ch. 8. Accordingly, thePresident having so declared, the Congress, as we bave stated, have affirmed that his order was valid, and that, all persons acting by autho rity, and consequently as a court pronouncing such sentence upon the offender as tbe usage of war re^ quires, arejustifiedby the law of tbe land. With all respect, permit me to say, that the learned gentleman has manifested more acumen and ability in his elabo rate argument, by what be has omitted to say, than by anything which he has said. By the act of July 2, 1864, cap. 215. it is provided that the commanding General in thefield, or the commander pf the department, as the ^ase may be, pbali have power to carry into exe- cubiori all sentences against guerrilla marauders .for robbery, arson, burglary, Ac, and for violation of the laws and customs of war, as well as sentences against spies, mutineers, deserters and murderers. From tbe legislation I bave cited, it is apparent that military commissions are expressly recognized by the law-making power: that they are authorized to try capital offenses against citizens not in the service of the United States, and to pro. ounce the sentence of death upon them; and that the commander of a de partment, or the commanding general in the field, may Garry such sentencelnto execution. But, says the gentleman, grant all this to be so, Congress has not de clared In what manner th** court shall be constituted. The answer to that objection has already been antici pated in the citation from Ren et, wherein it appeared to he the ruleof tbelaw martial tbat in tbe punish ment of all military offenses not provided for by tbe written law ofthe land, military commissions are con stituted for that purpose by the authority of tbe com*- mantling officer or the Commander-in-Chief, as tne case may be, who selects the officers of a court-martial; tbat they are similarly constituted, and their proceed? ings conducted according to the same general rules. That is a part of the very law martial which tbe Pre sident proclaimed, and which the Congress has legal ized. The proclamation has declared^ that all such offenders shall be tried by military commissions. The Congress has legalized thesame by the act which I have cited; arid by every Intendment it must be taken that as martial law Is. by the proclamation, declared to be the rule by which they shall be tried, the Congress, in affirming the act of the P - esident, simply declared that they should be tried according tOjthe customs of martial law; that tbe Commission should be consti tuted by the Commander-in-Cniei'aGoording to the rule of procedure known as martial law, and that the penalties inflicted sho*ld ba in accordance with the> laws of war aud the usages of nations. >. Legislation no more definite than this has been upon your statute book: since the beginning of the century, and has been held by the Supreme Court of the United States valid for tbe punishment of offenders. By the thirtj'-second arbicle of the act of 23d April, 1800, it is provided that "all crimes committed by per sons belonging to the navy whicb are not specified in theforegoingfarticles shall be punished according to the laws ami customs in such cases at sea." Of this article the Supreme Court of the United States say, thatwhen offenses and crimes, are not given in terms or by definition, tbe want of it may be supplied by a comprehensive enactment, sue1! as the thirty-second article of the rules for tbe government of the navy; wbiebmeans that courts-martial have jurisdiction of such crimes as are not specified, but which have been recognized to be crimes and offenses by the usages in navies of all nations, and, th^t they shall be punished according to tue laws and customs of the sea.— (Dynes vs. Hoover, 20 Howard, 82.) Butit is a fact that must not be omitted in the reply which I make to the geutleman's^argument, thab an effort was made by himself and others in the Senate of tbe United States, on the 3d of March last, to condemn the arrests, imprisonments, &c, made by order of the President of the United States in pur suance of his proclamation, and to reverse, hy the judgment of that bodv, the law which hadbeea before passed affirming his action, which effort most signally failed. Thus we see tbat the body which, by the Constitu tion, if thePresident had been guilty of the misde meanors alleged against him in this argument of the TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 185 gentleman, would, upon presentation of such charge in legal form against the President, constitute the high court of impeachment for his trial and condemnation, has decided tbe question in advance, and declared upon the occasion referred to, as they had before de clared by solemn enactment, that this order of tbe President declaring martial law and the punishment of all rebels and insurgents, their alders and abettors, by military commission, should be enforced during the Insurrection as tho law of the land, and that the offenders should be tried as directed by military com mission. It may be said that this subsequent legisla tion of Congress, ratifying and affirmmgwhat had been done by the President, can havo no validity. Of course, it cannot if neither theCongress northe Executive can authorize the proclamation and enforcement of mar tial law in the suppression of rebellion for the punish- ment of al) persons committing military offenses in aid ofthat rebellion. Assuming, however, as the gentle man seemed to assume, by asking for the legislation of Congress, that there is such power in Congress, the Supreme Court of the United States has solemnly affirmed that such ratification is valid. (2 Black, 671.) The gentleman's argument is full of citations of Eng lish precedent^ There isalate English precedent bear ing upon this point — the power of the legislature, by subsequent enactment, to legalize executive orders, ar rests and imprisonment of citizens— that I beg leave to commend to his consideration. I refer to the statute of 11 and 12 Victoria, ch. 35, entitlod "An act to em power the Lord Lieutenant, or other chief governor or governors of Ireland, to apprehend and detain until the 1st day of March, 1849. such persons as he or they shall suspect of conspiring against her Majesty's per son and Government," passed July 25, 1848. which statute in terms declares that all and every person and persons who is. are,,or shall be. within tbat period, within that part ofthe United Kingdom of England and Ireland called Ireland at or ou the day the act shall receive her Majesty's royal assent, or after, by warrant for high treason or treasonable practic s, or suspicion of high treason or treasonable practices, Signed by the Lord Lieutenant, or other chief governor or governors of Ireland lor the time being, or his or their chief secretary, for such causes as aforesaid, maybe detained in safe custody, without bail or main prize, until tbe first day of March, 1849; and that no fudge or justice shall bail or try any such person or persons so committed, without order from her Ma jesty's privy counsel, until the said first day of March. 1849, any law or statute to the contrary notwithstand ing. The second section of this act provides that, in cases where any persons have been, before the passing bf the act, arrested, committed or detained for such cause by warrant or warrants signed by the officers aforesaid, or either of them, It may be lawful for the person or persons to whom such warrants have been or shall be directed, to detain such person or persons in liis or their custody in any place whatever in Ireland; and that such person or persons to whom such warrants have been or shall be directed shall be deemed and taken, to all intents and purposes, lawfully authorized to take into safe custody and be the lawful jailers and keepers of such persons so arrested, committed, or detained. Here the power of arrest Is given by the act of Parlia ment to the Governor or his Seoretary; tha process of the civil courts was wholly suspended; bail was denied and the parties imprisoned, and this not by process of the courts, but by warrant ofa Chief Governor or his Secretary, not for crimes charged to have been com mitted, but for being suspected of treasonable practices. Magna charta it seems opposes no restraint, notwith standing the parade that is made about it in this argu ment upon the power of the Parliament of England to iegalizearrests and Imprisonments made betorethe passage of the act upon an executive order, and without colorable authority of statute law; and to authorize like arrests and imprisonments ol so many of six million or people as such executive officers might suspect ot trea- 60But,1sw*sathegentleman, whatever may be the pre cedents English, or American, whatever may be the provisions Sf the Constitution, whatever may be the legislation of Congress, whatever may be the procla- mltions and orders ofthe President as Commander-in- chief, it is a usurpation and a tyranny in time of re bellion and civil war to subieet any citizen to trial for any crime before military tribunals, save such citizens ai are in the land or naval forces, and against this usurpation which he asks this Court to rebuke by so lemn decision, he appeals to public opinion. I trust that I set as high* value upon enlightened public ODinionasanyman. I recognize it as the reserved nower of the people which creates and dissolves ar- S, which creates and dissolves legislative assem blies which enacts and repeals fundamental laws, the better to provide for personal security by the due ad ministration of Justice. To that public opinion upon ttisvery qSestionof the usurpation of authority, of £ni«*fffl arrests, and unlawful imprisonments, and Snlawfu triafs, condemnations and executions by the late President of the United States, an appeal has al- iKirtv been taken to public opinion. On this very issue toePrelfdent^ was tried before the tribunal of the peo- Pll, that great nation of freemen who cover this conti nent, looking out upon Europe from their eastern and upon Asia from their western homes. That- people came to the consideration of this issue not unmindful of tho fact that the first struggle for the establishment of our nationality could not have been, and was not successfully prosecuted without the proclamation and enforcement of martial law, declaring, as we' have seen, that any inhabitant who, during that war, should kill any loyal citizen, or enter into any combination for that purpose, should, upon trial and conviction be fore a military tribunal, be sentenced as an assassin, traitor or spy, and should suffer death, and tbat ia this last struggle for the maintenance of Americarr natlonaltty tbe President but followed the example of tbe illustrious Father of his Country. Upon that issue the people passed judgment on the 8th day of last No vember, and declared that the charge of usurpation was lalse. Prom this decision of tbe people there lies no appeal on this earth. Who can rightfully challenge the au thority of the Am erican people to decide such questions for themselves ? The voice of tbe people, thus solemnly proclaimed, by the omnipotence oi'the ballot, in favor of the righteous order of their murdered President, Issued by him for the common defense, for .the preser- . vation of the Constitution, and for the enforcement of the laws ofthe Union, ought to be accepted, and will be accepted. I trust, by all just men, as the voice of God. Mr. Ewing said, I ask permission ofthe Court to say In response to the allusion of tbe Assistant Judge Ad vocate to my acts as military commander, that he will find in the Bureau of Military Justice no records ofthe trial in my former commands of any persons not in the military service of tbe United States or in the Con federate service, except guerillas, robbers and others, fwstes humani generis taken flagrante bello, with arms in their hands, or in acts of hostility, and if he will do me the favor to refer to my argument on the jurisdic tion, he will see that I not only did not deny, but con ceded the power of arrest and summary punishment by tbe commanding general in the field of all such per sons; restricted only by the laws and the orders of military superiors. The Court adjourned until to-morrow, at 1 o'clock. Wednesday, June 28.— The Court met at 1P.M. when Associate Judge Bingham resumed his argument as follows :— May it please the Court: Ibavesaid thus much con cerning the right of tbe people under their Constitu tion. In time of civil war and rebellion, to proclaim through their Executive, with the sanction and ap proval of their Congress, martial law, and enforce the same according to the usage of nations. I submit tbat it has been shown that, by the letter and spirit of the Constitution, as well as by its con temporaneous construction, followed and approved by every department of the Government, this right is in the people; that it is inseparable from the condition of war, whether civil or foreign, and absolutely es sential to its vigorous and successful prosecution; that, according to the highest authority upon constitu tional law, tbe proclamation and enforcement of mar tial law are "usual under all Governments in time of rebellion;" that our own hfghest judicial tribunal has declared this and solemnly ruled that the question -Of the necessitv for its exercise rests exclusively with t'ongress and the President ; ahd that the decision of the political departments of the Government ,that there Is an armed rebellion and a necessity for the em ployment of military force and martial law in Its sup pression, concludes thejudiciary. In submitting what I have said in support of the jurisdiction of this honorable Court and of its constitu- tionu 1 power to henr and determine this issue, I have ut tered my own convictions, andfbr their utterance in de fense of my country and Its right to employ all the means necessary for tho common defense against armed re bellion and secret treasonable conspiracy in aid of mich Bebellion, I shall neither ask nor offer apology. I find no word? with which more fitly to conclude all I have' to sav upon the question of the jurisdiction and constitutional authority of this Court than those em ployed by the illustrious Lord Brougham to the House of Peers, in supp -rt of the bill referred tp, which em powered the Loud Lieutenant of Ireland and his de puties to apprehend and detain, for the period of seven months or more, all such persons within that Island as they should suspect of conspiracy against Her Majesty s Hereon and Government. Said that illustrious man, " A friend of liberty I have lived, and such will I die; nor care I how soon the latter event may happen, it I cannot be a friend of liberty without being a friend of traitors at the same time, a protector or criminals of the deepest dye, an accomplice of foul rebellion and of its concomitant civil war, with all its atrocities and all its fearful consequences." (Hansard's Debates, lid series, vol. lOu, p. 635.) May It please th« Court:— It only remains for 186 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON: me to sum up the evidence, and present my views of tbe law arising upon the facts in the case on trial. The quesiions of fact involved in the issue are:— First. J?:d the accused, or any two of them, confede rate and conspire together as charged? and Second., Did, the accused, or any of them, in pur suance of such conspiracy. , and with the intent al leged, commit either or all of the several acbs speci fied? ¦ . , , * If the conspiracy be established, as laid, it results that whatever was said or done by either of tbe par ties thereto, in the furtherance or execution of tbe common design, is ihe- declaration or act of all the o'her parties to the conspiracy; and this whebherthe other parties, at, the li uae such words were uttered, or such acts done by the.r confederates, were present or absent, here, within tho intrenched lines, of your Capi-. tal, or crouching behind the intrenched Jines of Rlcb- mond, or awaiting the results of their murderous plot aga'nsL their country, its Cbnfctitution and laws, across the border, under the shelter or the Brit.sh Mag. The declared and accepted rule of law in cases of conspiracy is that:— "In prosecutions for conspiracy it is an established yule that where several persons are proved to have combined together Ior thesame illegal , purpose, any act done by one of the par'y. m pursuance ofthe origi nal concerted plan, and in reference to the common object, is, inthe con.emplalion oi'law, as well as in sound reason, the act of the whole party: and. there fore, the proof of the act will be evidence against any of thp others, who were engaged in the same general conspiracy, without regard to the question whether the prisoner, is proved Ho have been concerned in the particular transaction." (Phillips on .Evidence, P^2,i0). . , .Thesame rule obtains In cases oftreason:;— "If seye-1 ral persons agree to, levy war, some in one place and some iu another,, and one party do,actually appear in arms, this is a levying of war by. all, as well those .who were not in arms as th jse who were, it it were done i i pursuance ofthe original concert, for those who made the attempb were emboldened by the confidence in spired by; the .general concert, and therefore these particular acts are in justice imputable to all The rest." (I EastM Pleas of the Crown, p. 97; Eo^coe, 81). Iu ex parte Bollman and Sioartwoul, 4 Cranch. 126, Marshall,. Chief Justice, rules:— ¦' If war be actua'ly levied', that is. if a body ot men be actually assembled, for the purpose of effecting, by force, a treasonable purpose, all those who perform -any part, however minute, or however remote, from the sqrne of action, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy are to be considered as traitors." In United States vs.. Cole retal., 5 McLean, 601, Mr. Jus tice McLean says:— 'A conspiracy Is rarely if ever proved by positive testimony. When a crime of high magnitude is about to be perpetrated by a combination ot individuals, they do nocneb openly, bubcovertlyand secretly. The purpose formed is known only to those who enter into it.- "Uness one of the original conspira- to';s betray bis companions and givoVvidence against them, their guilt can be proved only by circumstantial evidence. * * It is said by some writers on evidence that such, circumstances are stronger than positive proof.; A witness swearing posjtively.it is said, may misapprehend the facts or swear falsely, but that cir cumstances cannot lie. "The common design is the essence of thecharge; and this may be made to appear when the defendants steadily pursue the same object, whether acting sepa rately or together, by common or different means, all leading to thesame unlawful result. And wherepr/mn facie evidence has been given of a combination, the acts or conlessions of one are evidence againsfe-all. * * It Isrcasonable that whereabody of men assume the attribute of individuality, whether ior commercial business or for the commission ofa crime, that the as sociation should be bound by ihe acts of one of its members in carrying out the design." It is a rule of the law, not to be overlooked in this connection, that the conspiracy or agreement of the parties, or some of them, to act in concert to accom plish the unlawful act charged, may be established either by direct evidence of a meeting or consultation for the illegal purpose charged, ormore usually, from the very nature of the case, by circumstantial evi dence. (2 Startle, 232.) Lord Mansfield ruled that It was not necessary to prove tbe actual fact ofa conspiracy, but that it might be collected from collateral circumstances. (Parson's Case, lW.Blackstone,3i>2.) "IV says a great authority on the law of evidence, "on a charge of conspiracy, it appear that two persons by their acts are pursuing the same object,, and olten by tbe same means, or one performing part of the act. and the other completing it. for the attainment of the* same object, the jury may d; aw the conclusion there is a conspiracy. If a conspiracy bo' formed and a per son join In it afterwards, he' 19 equally guilty with the original conspirators." (Roscoe, 415.) '¦The rules of the admissibility of the acts and de clarations of any one oi'the conspirators, said or done in furtherarice1 ofthe common design, applies in cases as well where only part of the" conspirators are in- -¦ dieted, or upon trial, as where all fire Indicted and upon trial. Thus, upon an indictment for murder, if it appear that others, together with tbe prisoner, con spired to^ommit the crime, the act of one, done in pursuance ofthat intention, will be evidence against the rest." (2Starkie, 237.) Tbey^areall alike guilty as principals. (Common wealth vs Knapp,'0. Pickering, 496! 10 Pickering, 477; 6 Term Reports. 528: n East, 584.)- Wbat is the evidence, direct and circumstantial? That the acchsed, or either of them, together with John H. Surratt, John Wilkes Booth, Jefferson Davis. George N. Sanders. Beverly Tucker, Jacob Thompson, William G, Cleary, Clement O. Cfay, George Harper and George Young, did combine, confederate and con spire in aid of tbe existing Rebellion, as charged, to ki'l and murder within the military department of Washington, and within the fortified and intrenched lines thereof, Abraham Lincoln, late. and. at thermae c the said combining, comederating and conspiring,. President of tbe United States of America, and Com mander-in-Chief of the Army and JNavy thereof: An drew Johnson, "Vice Fresidentof the United States:-- William. n.-Seward, Secretary of State oi the United; Sta tes. and Ulysses S. Grant, Lieutenanb-Oeneral ofthe armies thereof, and, then in command, under the di rection of thePresident. The time, as laid in the charge and spec'fication, when this conspiracy was entered into, 13 immateriali- so that It appears by tb^ evidence that the criminal. combination and agreement were lbrmed beiore the' commiss.on of the acts alleged. That Jefferson Davis, oneof the conspirators named, was the acknowledged, chie. andleader of the existing Rebellion against the Government of the United States, and that Jacob Thompson. GeargeN. Sanders. Clement C. Clay, Bev erly Tucker, and others named in tbe specification, were hia duly accredited and authorized agen's to act iu theint' rests of said Rebellion, are facts established by the testimony in this case beyond*ali question. That Davis, as the leader of said Rebellion, gave to those agents, then in Canada, commissions in blank, bearing tbe official signature of the war minister, James A. Seddon, to be by them filled up and delivered to such agent? aa they might 'employ to act in the interests of the Rebellion within the United States, and intended to b<-» a cover find ¦ protect on for any crimes ¦ tbey might there'n commit in the service of the Rebellion,. are also facts established here; and which no man can ga'nsay. y/ho doubts that Kennedy, whose confes sion, made in view of immediate death as proved here was commissioned by ihoseaccredited>agentg ofDavia to burn the city ofNew York? that hewas to have at tempted it on the night of the Presidential election, and that he did, in combination -With his confederates, setfireto ibur hote'sin theory of jSTew York on the night ofthe 25ih ofNovember last? Whodoub's that, in likemannerin the interests ot theR-be Iron and by tbeau'foriiy of Davis, the e his agents also commis sioned Bennett II. Young to eomna't a '•son. robbery/ and the murder of unarmed citizens in St. Albans, Vermont? ¦ Who doubts,' upon the t'.stimory'shown, that Davis, by his agents, deliberately adopted tbe sys tem or starvation for the murder ofourcaptivesoldver3 in his hands, or that, as shown by the testimony, he sanctioned the burning of hospitals and steamboats, tbepropertyofrrivate persons, r.n-l paid therefor from his stolen treasure the sum oi thirty-five thousand dol lars in gold ? • By the evidence of Joseph Hyams it is proved that Thompson— the a^ent of Jefferson Davis— paid him mohoyfor theservice be 'rep tiered in the infamous and fiendish project of impor:in~ pestilence into our camps and cities to destroy the lives of citizens and soldiers a1 ike, and. into thehouse of thePresident for the purpose of destroying his life. It may be sa'd.and doubtless will besaH, by the pensioned advocatesof thi-3 Rebel! 'on.that Hyam-**, being in I'amnuijs not to be believed. It is admitted that he isinramous.jsitmust be conceded that any man is in ^mous who either par ticipates In such a crime or attempts In a-iv wayto ex tenuate it. But it will ho observed that Hyams is sup ported by the testimony of Mr. Sandford Conover, whb heard Blackburn and tbe other Rebel agents in Canada speak of this infernal project, and' by the tes- timonvotMr. Wall, the well-known auctioneer of this city, whose character isunques;ioned.that he received this importation of pestilence (of ccurse without any knowledge of tbe purpose), a-id t.iat Hyams con signed1, the goods to mm in thenameof J. W. Harris— a fact in itself an acknowledgment of guilts ard that he received afterwards a letter lrom Harris, dated To ronto, Canada West, December 1, IBS'!, wherein Harris stated that he had not been able tocime totlioStites since his return to Canada, ahd uskel fbr an account of the sale. He identifies the JosepbGodfrey Hyams who testified In Cottrt as the J. W. Harris who imported the pestilence. The verv transaction shows i hat Hyams' statement is truthful. He gives the names of the parties connected with this in famy (dement C. Clay, Dr. Blackburn, Rev. Dr. Stuart 'Robinson, J. Q. Holcomb— all rei'UgeeS from the Confederacy in Canada), and states that be igave Thompson a receipt for the fifty dollars paid to him. and that lie wa^-by occupation a shoemaker; in none of which facts is there an attempt to dis- TRIAL OP THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 187 credit him. It is not probable that a man in his posi tion in life would be able to buy five trunks of clothing, ship them all the way from Halifax to Washington, and then order them to be sold at auction, without regard to price, solely upon his own account. It is a matter of notoriety, that a part of hia statement is verified by the results at Newbern, North Carolina, to which point, he says, a portion of the iniected goods were shipped, through a sutler; the result of which was, that- nearly two thousand citizens and soldiers died there about tbat time.with the yellow fever. Tbat tbe Rebel Chief. Jefferson Davis, sanctioned these crimes, committed and attempted, through the instrumentality of his accredited agents in Canada, Thompson, Clay, Tucker, Sanders, Cleary, &c„ upon the persons and property of the people of the North, there is positive proof on your record. The letter brought from, Richmond, and taken from tbe archives of his late pretended Government there, dated Feb ruary 11, 1865. and addressed to him by a late Rebel Senator from Texas, W. S. Oldham, contains tha fol lowing significant words:— "When Senator Johnson, of Missouri, and myself waited on you a few days since, in relation to the project of annoying and harrassing the enemy by means of burning their shipping, towns, &c, bears witness to his own complicity and his own iniamy in.this proposed work of destruction and crime for the future, as well as to his complicity in wbat had before beeniattempted without complete success. Ken nedy, with his confederates, had failed to burn thecity of New York. "The combustibles" which Kennedy had employed were, it seems, defecblve. This was "a difficulty to be overcome." Neibherhadhe been able to consummate the dreadful work without subjecting himself to detection. This was another "difficulty to be overcome." Davis, on the 20th of February, 1865, in dorsed upon this letter these words:— "Secretary of State, at bis convenience, see General Harris and learn what plan he has for overcoming the difficulties hereto- fore experienced. J. D." ¦ This indorsement is unquestionably proved to be the handwriting of Jefferson Davis, andit bears witness on its face that the monstrous proposition met his ap proval, and that he desired his Rebel Secretary of State, Benjamin, to see General Harris, and learn how to overcome thedifflculty heretofcrre -experienced, to wit : the inefficiency of "the combustible materials" that had been employed, and the liability of hisagents to detection. After this, who will doubt that he had en deavored, by the hand of incendiaries, to destroy by fireiihe property and lives of the people of theNorth, andJthereby "fill them with terror and consternation;" thafi he knew hisagents had been unsuccessful: that he knew bis agents had been detected in their villany and punished for their crime; that he desired through a more periect "chemical preparation," by tbe science and, skill of Professor McCulloch, to accomplish suc cessfully what had been uasuccessfullv*attempted? The intercepted lebter of his agenb. Clement C. Clay, dated St. Catherine's, Canada West, November l, 1864, is an acknowledgment and confession of what they bad attempted, and a suggestion made through J. P. Benjamin,Rebel Secretary of State, of what remained to be dorie, in order to make the "chemical prepara tions" efficient. Speakiug of this Bennett H. Young, he says:— "You have doubtless learned, through the press ofthe United States of the raid on St, Albans by about twenty:five Confederate soldiers, led by^eu- tenaatBennett.H. Young; of their a, tempt and faimre to burn the-town; of their robbery of three banks there of the aggregate amount of about two hundred thou sand dollars; of their arrest in Canada by the United States forces; of their commitment and tbe pending preliminary trial." He makes application, In aid of Young and his asso ciates, for additional dacumenbs, showing that they acted upon the authority of the Confederate States Government, taking care to say, however, that he held such authority at the time, but that it ought tobe more explicit, so far as regards the particular facts complained of. He states that he met Young at Hali fax, in May. 1864, who developed his plans for retalia tion on the enemy; that he, Clay, recommended him to the Rebel Secretary of War; that after this, "Young/ was sent back by the Secretary of War with a com mission as Second Lieutenant, to execute his plans and purposes, but to report to Hon. and myself." Young afterwards "proposed passing through New England, burning some towns and robbing them of whatever he could convert to tbe use of tbe Con federate Government. This I approved as justi fiable retaliation. He attempted to burn the town of St. Albans, Vermont, and would have succeeded but for the failure of the diemical preparation with which he was - armed. He then robbed tho banks of funds amounting to over two hundred thousand dol lars. That be was not prompted by Belfish or merce nary motives I am as well satisfied as I am that he is an honest man. He assured me before going that his effort would be to destroy towns and farm-houses, but not to plunder or rob; but he said if. after firing a town, he saw he could take funds from a bank or any house, and thereby might inflict injury upon the ene my and benefit his own Government, he would do so. He added most emphatically that whatever he took should be turned over to the Government, or its repre sentatives in foreign lands. My instructions to him were to destroy whatever was valuable, not to stop to rob: but if, after firing a town, he could seize and carry off money, or Treasury or bank notes, he might do so upon condition that they were delivered to the proper authorities of the Confederate States," tbat is, to Clay himself: When he wrote this letter, it seems that this accred ited agent of Jefferson Davis was as strongly impressed with the usurpation anddespotism of Mr. Lincoln's Ad ministration as some of the advocates of his aiders and abettors seem to be at this day; and he indulges in tbe following statement:— "AU that a large portion of the Northern people, especially in the Northwest, want to resist th oppressious ofthe despotism at Washington is a leader. They are ripe ior resistance, arid it may come soon after the Presidential election. At all events, it must come, if our armies are not overcome, or de stroyed, or dispersed. No people of the Anglo-Saxon blood can long endure the usurpations and tyrannies of Lincoln." Clay does not sign the despatch, but indorses the bearer of it as a person who can identify bim and give bis name. The bearer of that ietter was the wit ness Richard Montgomery, who saw Clay write-a por tion ofthe letter, and received it from his hands, and subsequently delivered to the Assistant Secretary of war ofthe United States, Mr. Dana. That theletter is in Clay's handwriting is clearly proved by those fami liar with it, Mr. Montgomery testifies that he was instructed by Clay to deliver this letber to Benjamin, the Rebel Secretary of State, it he could get through to Richmond, and to tell him what names to put In tbe This ietter leaves no doubt, if any before existed, in the mind of anyone who had read the letter of Old ham, aud Davis' indorsement thereon, that "the che mical preparations" and ''combustible materials" had been tried and had failed, and it became a matter of great moment and concern that they should be so pre pared as, in tbe words;of Davis, "to overcome the diffi culties heretofore experienced;" that is to say, com plete the work of destruction, and secure the perpetra tors against personal injury or detection in the per formance of it. , , t, . J.. It only remains to be seen whether Davis, tbe pro curer of arson and ofthe indiscriminate murder of tbe innocent and unoffending necessarily resultant there from, was capable alsoot endeavoring to procure, and in fact did procure, the murder, bydirect assassination, of thePresident of the UnitedStates and others charged witb the duty ot maintaining the Government of tbe United States, and of suppressing the Rebellion in which this arch-traitor and conspiratorwas engaged. The official papers of Davis, captured under the guns of our victorious army in his R«bel Capital, identified beyond question or shadow of doubt, and placed upon your record, together with the declarations and acts of his co-conspirators and agents, proclaim bo all the world that be was capable of attempting ; to accomplish his treasonabre procuration of the murder of the lata President, and other chief ofiicers of tbe United States, by the hands of hired assassins. in the fall of 1864, Lieutenant W. Alston addressed to "his Excellency" a letter now be/ore the Court, which contains tbe following words: "I now offer you my services, and if you will favor me in ma designs, I will proceed, as soon as my health will permit, to ridtovy country oi some oTher deadliest enemies, by striking at the very hurts' blood of those who seek to enchain her in slavery. I consider nothing 188 TRIAL' OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. dishonorable having such a tendenoy. All I ask of you -is, to lavor me by granting me the necessary papers., .&o., to travel on. * * * * I am perfectly familiar wilhthe North, and feel confidentthatl can execute any thing I undertake. I **as *ri -the raid last June in Ken tucky, under General John H.< Morgan; * * * was taken prisoner,' * * * escaped from them by dress ing myself inthe^arb ofa citizen. #¦ .*, * I went through to the Cauadas, from whence, by the assistance of Colonel J. P; Holcomb, I succeeded in working my way around and through the blockade. * * * I should like to have a personal interview with you in order to perfect the arrangements before starting.'.' Is there any room to doubt that this was a proposi tion to assassinate, by the hah d of this man aud hie associates, such persons inthe North as be deemed the "deadliest enemies" of the Rebellion? Tbe weak ness of tbe man who, for a moment, can doubt that such was the proposition of tbe writer of this letter, is certainly an object of cohamiseration. What had Jef ferson Davis to say to this prooosed assassination of tbe "deadliest enemies" in the Jtforth of his great trea son? Did the atrocious suggestion kindle in him in dignation against the villain who offered, with his own band, to strike the blow? Not at all., Onthecoutrary, he ordered his private secretary, oa the 29th of No vember, 1864, to indorse upon the fetter these words:^- "Lieutenant A. W. Alston, accompanied raid into Kentucky, and was captured; but escaped into Cana da, from whence be found his way back. Now offers his services to rid the country of some of its deadliest enemies; asks ior' papers, &c. Respectfully referred, by direction of the President, to the honorable Secretary of War.'* It Is also indorsed, for attention, "By order." Signed "J. A. Campbell, Assistant Secretary of War." Note the fact, in this connection, that Jefferson Davis himself, as well as his subordinates, bad, beiore tbe date of this indorsement, concluded that Abraham Lincoln was "the deadliest enemy" of the Rebellion. You hear it in the Rebel camp in Virginia, in 1863, de- 1 clared by'Bootb, then and there present, and assented to by 'Rebel officers, that '* Abraham Lincoln must be killed." You hear it in that slaughter-pen in Georgia, Andersonville, proclaimed abating Rebel officers, who, by the slow torture of starvation, inflicted cruel and untimely death on ten thousand of your defenders, captives in their hands whispering, like demons, their horrid purpose, "Abraham Liuco n must be killed." Aud iri Canada, the accredited agents of Jefferson Davis, as early as October, 18G4, and afterward, de clared that "Abraham Lincoln must bekilledi" it'his re-eleetiori could not be prevented. These agents in Canada, on the 13th of October. 1864; delivered, in cipher, to be transmitted to Richmond by'I-iichard Montgomery, the witness whose reputation- Is un challenged, the following communication:— "Qotoeek 1'J, 1864.— We agairi urge the immense ne cessity of our gaining immediate advantages. Strain every nerve for victory.' We now look upon the re election of Lincoln in November as almost certain, and we need to whip these hirelings to prevent it. Besides, witb Lincoln re-elected and hiB armies victorious, we need not hope even for recognition, much less the help mentioned, in our last. Holcomb will explain this. Those figures of the Yankee armies are correct to a unit. fiCar friends shall be immediately set to work as you direct." To which an official reply, in cipher, was delivered to Montgomery by an agent of the State Department in Richmond, dated October 19, 1864, as fellows.:— " Your letter of tbe liith inst. is at hand. There Is yet time enough to colonize many voters before No vember. A blow will shortly b« stricken here. It Is not quite time. General Longstreet U to attack Sheri dan without delay, and then move North as far as practicable toward Unprotected points. This will be made instead of 'movement before mentioned. He will endeavor to assist tihe Republicans in collecting Wteir ballots. Be watchful and assisL him.'' On the very day of the date of this Richmond de spatch bheridari'was attacked, and with what success history will declare. The Court wili not fail to notice that the re-election of Mr. Lincoln is to beiprevemed. if possible, by any and every meaus. Nor will they fail -to notice that Holcomb Is to " explain this"— tho same person who, in Canada, was tho friend aud adviser of Alston, who proposed to Davis the assassination of tha "deadliest enemies" of the Rebellion. ¦Iri the despatch of the 13th of October, which was borne by Montgomery, and transmitted to Richmond in October last, you will find these words:— "Our friends shall beimmediately set to work as you direct." Mr. Lincoln is thersubjeot ofthat despatch. Davis is 'therein notified that hid agents in Canada look upon the re-election of Mr. Lincoln In November as almost certain. In this conriection he is assured by those agents that the friends of their cause are to beset to work as Davis had.directed. The conversations which are proved' by witnesses, whose charact<->r 'stands uriimpeached, disclose what "work" the "friends" were to do under the dirrectioi% of Davis hinaself. Who were these "ffriendsv" and What was "the work which bis agents, Thompson, C'ay, Tucker, aud Banders, had been directed to set them at? Let Thompson answer for himself. In a conversation With Richard Montgomery, in uie sum mer of 1864, Thompson said "hehadhis; friends, Con federates, all over the Northern States* who were ready and willing to go any len-gtbfor the goad of thecause of the.South, and hei could at. any time have the tyrant I/incoln. or any other of hU advisers that he chose* put out of. his way; that tbey would not consider it a crime when dome ior the cause of tha Confederacy." This conversation was repeated by the witness in the sum mer .of ISM to Clement C. Clay,who immediately stated: —"That is bo; we are all devoted to our cause, and ready to go any leDgth^-to do anything under the sun.'.' At.and about the time that these declarations of Clay andThompspn were made, Alston, who made the pro position, as we have seen, to Davis, to- be furnished with papers to go North and rid the Confederacy of some of its "deadliest enemies." was in Canada. He was> doubtless, one or the "frierids'' referred to. As appears from the testimony of Montgomery, Payne, the prisoner at your bar, was about that .time in Canada, and was seen standing by Thompson's door, engaged in a conversation with Clay, between whom and the witness some words were interchanged, when Clay stated he (Payne) was one of their friends, "we trust him.-"> It is proved beyond a shadow of doubt, that in October last, Joh.i Wildes Booth, the assassin of the President, was also in Canada and upon inti mate terms w.th Thompson, Clay, Sanders, and other Rebel agents. Who can doubt, in tne light of the events which have- since transpired-, that he was one ofthe "friends" to be ••'set to work," as Davis had al ready directed; not, perhaps, as yet to assassinate the President, but to do that otherwork which issuggested in the letter uf Oldham, indorsed by Davis in his own hand, and spread upon your record, the work-of the secret incendiary, which was to "fill the people ofthe North witb terror and consternation." The other "work" spoken of by Thompson, putting the tyrant Lincoln and anyof his advisers out oftlieway^ was work doubtless to be commenced only after the re election of Mr. Lincoln, which tbey had already de clared in their despatch to-their employer, Davis, was witb them a foregone conclusion. At all events, it was not until after the Presidential election in November tbat Alston proposed to Davis to goNorth on the work of assassinatiou; nor was ituntil a, ter that election that Booth was found in possession ofthe letter which is ia evidence* and which discloses the purpose to assassi nate tbe President. Being assured, however, when Booth was with them iu Cauada, as they had already declared in their despatch, that there-election of Mr, .Lincoln was certain, in which event there would be no hope for the Confederacy, they doubtless entered into thearrangement witb Booth as oneof their "friends," tirhab astsoon as that fact was determined be should go "to work,!' and as soon as might be "rid the Confe deracy of tbe tyrant Lincoln and of bis advisers." That these persons named upon youxrecord, Thomp son, Sanders, Clay, Cleary and Tucker, were the agents of Jefierson Davis, is another fact established in this case beyond a doubt. They made affidavit of it them selves., of record here, upon tho examination of their "friends,'''' charged with, the raid upon St. Albans, be iore, Judge Smith, m Canada. It is in evidence also by the letter of Clav, before referred to. The testimony, to which Ihave thus briefly referred, shows, by the letter ot'bis agents, of the -13th. of Octo ber, that Davis had beiore directed those agents to set his friends cstwork. By the letter of Clay, it seems that his direction had son in January, at Montreal, when be said that "a proposition bad been made to him to rid the world of the tyrant, Lincoln, Stanton, Grant,.and some others; that-he knew the men who bad made the proposition were bold, daring men, able to execute what they un dertook; that he himself was in favor of the pronosi- tion, but bad- determined to defer his answer unttwhe had consulted his Governmental Richmond: that he was then only awaiting their approval." This was about the middle of January, and. consequently, more tbanamontb after Alston had made his proposition direct, to Davis, in writing, to go North and rid their ConfederacyofsOnaeofits * deacFliestenemies." It was atthe titaeof this conversation that Payne, thepri soner, was seen by the witness standing at Thompson's door in conversation with Clay. This witness also shows the intimacy between Thompson. Clay, Cleary, Tucker and Sariders. A few days ai\ er the assassination ofthe President, Beverly Tucker said to this .witness "that President Lincoln deserved his death long ago; that it was a pity he didn't have it long ago*; and it was too bad that the boys bad not been allowed to act when they wanted to." This remark undoubtedly had reference to the pro positions made in the fall to Thompson, and .also i«> Davis; to rid the South of its deadliest enemies by their assassination. Cleary, who was accredited by Thompson as his confidential agent, also stated to this witness that Booth was one or the paity to whom Thorn pscnhad referred in the conversation in January, in which be said he knew the men who were ready to rid the world of tbe tyrant Lincoln, and of Stanton and Grant. Cleary also said, speaking of the assassi nation, "that it was a pity that the whole work bad not been done." and added " they had better look out, we are not done yet;" manifestly referring to the si*a*e- mentmadebybiaemployer, Thompson, beiore in the summer, that not only the tyrant Lincoln, butStanton and Grant, aud others of his advisers, should be put out of the way. Cleary also stated to this witness that Booth had visited Thompson twice in the winter, the last time in December, and had also been there in tbe summer. Sanford Conover testified that he had been for some time a clerk in the War Department in Richmond; that in Canada he knew Thompson. Sanders, Cleary, Tucker, Clay and, other Rebel agents; that he knew John H. Surratt and John Wilkes Booth; that he saw Booth there upon one occasion, and Surratt upon several- successive days; that be saw Surratt (whom he describes) in April last, in Thompson's room, ana also in compauy with Sanders; that about tbe 6th or 7th of April fast Surratt delivered to Jacob Thompson il de spatch, brouerht by him from Benjamin, at Richmond, inclosing one in cipher from Davis. Thompson had before this proposed to Conover to engage in a plot to assassinate President Lincoln and his Cabinet, and on tola occasion he laid his -hand upon these despatches and said, '"This makes the thing all rights" referring to the assent of the Rybel authorities, and stated that the Rebel- authorities had consented to the plot to assassinate Lincoln, Johnson, tbe Secretary of War, -Secretary of State, Judge Chase and General Grant. Thompson remarked further that the assassination ot .these parties would leave the Government of the United States entirely without a head; that there wa , no provision inthe Constitution of the United states by which they could eiect another President/ if these men were put out of the way. In speaking of this assassination of the President and otners, Thompson said that it .was only removing them lrom ollice; that the killing of a tyrant was no murder. It seems that he had learned precisely the Bame lesson that Alston had learned in November, when he communicated with Davis, and, said, speaking ofthe President's assa^slnution, "hedid not think any thing di> honorable that would serve their cause." Thompson stated atthesame time tbat hehad con i erred a commission on Booth, and that everybody engaged in the enterprise would be commissioned, and if it suc- ceeded,or failed, and tbey escaped into Canada, they cuuidnot be reclaimed urider the extradition treaty. The fact that Thompson aiid other Rebel agents hu.d blank commissions, as I have said, has been proved, and a copy of one-of them is on record here. This witness also testifier to a conversation with William C. Cleary, Shortly after the surrender of Lee's army, and on tho day before tbe President's assassina tion, at* ihe St. Lawrence Hotel. Montreal, when speaking oi the rejoicing iu tbeS.tates over the capture oi' Richmond. Cleary Baid, "they would put the, laugh on the other side of tbeir mouth in a day or two.1 These parties knew that Conover was in the secret of the assassi nation* and tallied with him about it as freely as they would speak of the weather. Before the assassination he-had-* conversationalso with Sanders. who asked him it he knew Booth well, and expressed Borne apprehension tbat Booth would "make a failure of it: that he was.desperate and reckless, and', he was afraid the whole thing would prove a failure." " Dr James D- MerrTtt testifies that George Young, one bf the parties named in the record, declared in his'nresence in Canada, Jast fall, that Lincoln should never bo inaugurated; that they had fiends in Wash ington who, I suppose, wcro soma ol the same friends referred to in the despatch of October i"4. and vtfliicfi. Davis had directed them "to set to work." George N. Sanders alsosaid to him l"tbat Lincoln would keep himselfmigbty close it he did serve another term;7' while Steele and other Confederates declared that the tyrant never should serve another term. He heard the assassination discussed at a meeting of these Rebel agents in Montreal in February last. "Sanders said tbey had plenty of money to accomplish the as sassination, and named a number of persons who were readv and willing to engage in undertaking to remove the President, Vice President, the Cabinet, and some of the leading Generals. At this meeting he read a letter which he had re ceived from Davis, which Justified Mm in making any arrangements that he could to accomplish the object/' Tins letter the witness heard read, and It, in substaficd declared that if thfe people in Canada and the South erners in the States were willing to submit to be go verned by such a tyrant as Lincoln, he did not wish to recognize them as friends. The letter was read openly; it was also handed to Colonel Steele, George Young, Hill and Scott to read. This was about the middle or February last. At this meeting Sanders named over the persons who were willing to accomplish the assas sination, and among the persons thus named was Booth, whom the witness had seen In Canada in Octo ber; also George Harper, one of the conspirators named on the record, Caldwell, Randall, Harrison and Surratt. The witness understood, from the reading of the letter, that if the President, Vice-President, and Cabinet could be disposed of, it would satisfy the peo ple- of the North that tbe Southerners had friends ill theNorth; that a peace. could be obtained on better terms; tbat the Rebels bad endeavored to bring about a war between the United States and England, and that Mr. Seward, through his energy and sagacity, had thwarted all their efforts; that was given as a reason lor removing him. On the 5th or 6th of April last', this witness met George Harper, Caldwell, Randall; and others, whoare spoken of in this meeting at Mon treal as engaged to assassinate the President and Cabi net, when Harper said they were going to the States to make a row such as had never been heard of, arid and added that v if I (the witness) did not hear of tbe death of Old Abe, of the Vice-President, and of Gen eral Dix, in less than ben days, I might put him down as a fool. That was on the 6th of April, He men tioned thatBooth was in Washington at that time. He said they had plenty of friends in Washington, and that some fifteen or twenty were goiug." This witness ascertained on the Sth of April that Har per and o tii Grant. That this agree- menb was substantially entered into by Booth and the agents of Davi3 in Canada as early as October, there cannot be any doubt. The language of Thompson at that time-and before was that he was in favor of tbe assassination. Hisfurther language was, thathe knew tbe men who were ready to do it, and Booth.it ia shown, was there at that time. and. as Thompson's Secretary says, was one of the men referred to by Thompson. Tho fact tbat others, besides the parties named on 190 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. the record, -were>. ,by the terms ofthe conspiracy. t° be assassinated, in nowise affects tho case now ou trial. If it is true that these parties didconsplre to murder other parties as well as those panaed upou the record, ,the substance of thecharge is proved. It is also' true that if, in, pursuance of that conspi racy. Booth, con I ecLerated with Surratt and the ac cuser, kille I and murdered Abraham Lincoln, the charge and specification is proved literally as stated on your recorH. although their conspiracy embraced Other persons. In law the case stands, though it may ^appear ttiat the conspiracy was tm kill and murder tbe parties named in thp, record, and others not' named in the record. If the proof is that the accused, with Booth, Surratt, Davis, &c, conspired to kill and murder one or more ofthe persons named, the charge of conspiracy is proved. The dec.aration of Sanders, as proved, that there was plenty of money, tocarry out this assassination, is very strongly corroborated by the testimony oJMMr. Campbell, cashier ot .the Ontario B1 nk, who states that Thompson, during tha current year preceeding the as sassination, had upou deposit in tbe Montreal branch of the Ontario Bank, six hundred aud forty-nine thousand dollars, besides large sums to his credit in other banks in tho Province. , " There is a further corroboration of the testimony of Conover as to the meeting of Thompson and Surratt in Moat real, and the delivery qf the despatches from Richmond, on the Cth or 7th ot April, first, in the fact wbicb is shown, by the testimony of Chester, that in the winter or spring Booth said he himself or some other party must go to Richmond; and, second, by the lettei of Arnold, dated 27th of March last, that.he pre^ ferred Booth's iirst query, that he would firsbgoto Richmond and see bow they would, take it. mani festly .alluding/ to. the proposed, assassination of the President. , It does not follow because Davis bad written a letter in February which, in substance, approved the general object that the parties were fully satisfied with it, be cause it is clear there was to be some arrangement made about the funds, andit is also clear that Davis bad not before as distinctly approvdand sancbionod this act as his agents either in Canada or here desired. Booth said to Chester, " We must have money; there is mouev in this business, and if you will enter into it I will place three thousand-dollars at the disposal of your family, but I have no money myself, aud must go to Richmond," or one of the- parties musb go, "to get money to carry out the enterprise." This was one of thearranacemenlsihat was to be "made right in Ca nada." Tbe funds at Thompson's disposal, as the banker testifies, were exclusively raised by drafts of the Secretary of the Treasury of the Confederate States upon London, deposited in their bank. to the credit of Thompson. . . Accordingly, a'jout the 27th of March, Surratt d!d go to Richmond. OntheiJd of April he returned to Wash- " Ingtou, and the sameday left for Canada. Beloreleav- ing, he stated to Weichman. that when in Richmond fie had a conversation with Davis and with Benjamin ¦The sact in this cr.uneetion is net to be overlooked, ,thatcn or a5out the day Surratt arrived in Montreal, April (i, Jacob Thompsnn, as th-p- cashier oi'the Ontario Bank fitatos,- drew of these Confederate funds the sum of one hundred and eighty thousand dollars in tbe form of certilicates. which, as the bank officer testifies, " mr;ht be used anywhere." What more i-3 wanting? Surely no word further need be spoken to show that John Wilke3 Booth was in this conspiracy: that John H. Surratt was iu this conspi racy; and that Jefferson Davis and his several agents named in Canada, weraia this conspiracy. If any ad ditional eviience is wanting to show the compile ty, of Davis in it. let tho paper found in the possession ot lr.3 hired assassin Booth come to bear witness agains' him. Tbat paper contained the secret cipher which Davis us diuhi3StaiPDenartmentiuRlchmond,which bo employed in communicating with Ins agents in Canada, and which they employed in the letter of Oc tober is, notifying him that "their friends would beset to work as fie had directed.'! ¦ *. i ¦ Tho letter in cipher found in Booth's possession Is translated hereby the use of the cipher machine now in Court, which, as the tostimonv o! Mr. Dana shows, he brought from the rooms of Davis' State Depart ment m Richmond. Who gave Booth this serret cipher? Of what use was it to him If he was not In confederation with Davis? • ¦ Bui; there is one other item of testimony that ought, among honest and intelligent people at all conver sant with this ev'/'enee, to end all further inquiry as to whether Jeffe.t>on Davis was one of the parties with Booth, as charged upon this record, In the conspiracy t*o assassinate the President and others. That Is, that on the fifth day after tbe assassination, in the city of Charlotte, Noith Carolina, a telegraphic despatch was received by him, at the house oi Mr. Bates, from John C. Breckinridge, his Rebel Secretary of War, which despatch is produced heie, identified by tho telegraph agent, and1 placed upon your record iu the words following*— .."GnicENsEono'. April I0;is6fi.— His Excellency Pre sident Davis:— President Lincoln was assassinated in the theatre at Washington on tho night of the 14th inst. Seward's . bouse was entered! oia-the samenlght, and he was repeatedly stabbed, and is probably mor tally wounded. JOHN C. BRECKINRIDGE." At the time this despatch was handed to him, Davis was addressing a meeting from the steps of Mr. Bates' bouse, and after reading the despatch to the people be sdfc:— t"If it wore to be done; it were better it were .well done/' Shortly afterward, in the house ofthe witness, in tbe same 'city, Breckinridge, having come to see Davis, stated his regret that the occurrence had bap- pened, because he deemed it unfortunate for the peo ple ofthe South at thattinie. Davis replied, relerring tothe assassination, "Well, General, I don't know; if it wereto be done at all, it were better that it were well done; and if the same had' been done to Andy John son, the beast, and Secretary Stanton, tbe job would then be compl&te/' i Accomplished as this man was in all the arts of la conspirator, ho was not equal to the task— as, happily. In the cood providence of ,God, no mortal man is— or concealing, by any form of words, any great crime which he may have meditated or perpetrated either against his Government or his fellow-man. It was doubtless furthest from Jefferson Davis' purpose to make confession, and yet bedid*make-confession. His guWt demanded utterance; that demand be could not resist; thereiore bis words proclaimed his guilt, in spite of his purpose to conceal it, Hesaid, "if it were to be done, it were betid* it were well done." Would any man ignorant of the conspiracy be able to devise and fashion such a form of speech as that? Had not the Presideut been murdered? Had he not reason to believe that the Secretary of State had been mortally wounded? Yet he was not satisfied but was com pelled to say. "it were better it were well done\'i that is to say, all that had been agreed to be done had not been done. Two days afterwards, in his conversation with Breckinridge, he not only repeats tbe same form of expression, "If it were to be done it were better it were well done," but adds these -words:— "And if the same bad been done to Andy Johnson, the beast, and to Secietary Stanton, thej'oo would then be complete." He would accept the assassination cf the President, tbe Vice President, of the Secretary of Staie, and the Sec- retaiy of War'as a complete execution ofthe "job," which he had given out upon contract, and which he had "made all right," so far as tbe pay was concerned, by the despatches he had sent to Thompson by Sur- ' rat t one oi his hired assassins. ' Whatever may be the convictions of others, mv own conviction is that Jefferson Davis is as clearly proven guilty ot this conspiracy as is John Wilkes Booth, by whose hahd J eherson Davis inflicted the mortal wound upon Abraham Lincoln. His words of intense hate, and rage, and disappointment are not to be over looked— that the assassins had not done their work well; that ihey had not succeeded in robbinsr the people altogether of tbeir constitutional Executive and hi's advisers; and hence he exclaims, "if they bad killed Andy Johnson, the beast!" Neither can he conceal bis cnagriuand disappointment tbat the war minister of the lepubhe. whose energy, incorruptible integrity, sleep ess vigilance, and executive«ability had organized day by day, month by month, and year by year, victory ior our arms, hud escaped the knife of the hired assas- • sins. The job, says this procurer of assassination, was not well done; it had been better if it had been well done! Because Abraham Lincoln bad been clear in his great office, and had saved the nation'slifeby enforcing the nation's laws this traitor declares he must be murdered; becauseMr. Seward, as tbe foreign Secretary of theocountry. bad thwarted the purposes of treasou to plunge his country into a war with England, he must be murdered; because, upon the murder of Mr. Lincoln, Andrew Johnson would succeed to the Presidency, and because he had been true to tbe Constitution and Government, faithful found among the faithless of bis own State, clinging to the failing pillars of the Republic when others had fled, he must be murdered; and becausethe Secretary of War had taken care, by the faithiul dis charge oi'his duties, that the Republic should -live and not die, he must be murdejed. Inasmuch as these two faithful officers were not also assassinated, assuming that the Secretary x>f State was mortally wounded, Davis could not conceal his disappoiritment and cha grin that the work was not "well done;*' that "the Job was not complete." Thus it appears by the testimony, that the propo sition made to Davis was to kill and murder the dead liest enemies of the Confederacy— not to kidnap them, i:s is now pretended here; that by the declaration of Sanders, Tucker, Thompson, Clav, Cleary, Harper and Young, the conspirators in Canada, the agreement and combination among them was to kill and murder Abraham Lincoln, Wm. H. Sewftrd, Andrew Johnson, Ulysses S. Grant, Edwin M. Stanton, arid others of hia advisers, and not to kHnap them; it appears from. every Utterance of John Wilkes Booth, as well as from the Charles Selby letter, of which, mention wllpre- sentlybe made. that, as early as November, the pro position with biha was to kill and murder, not to kid nap. . Since the flrst examination of Conover, who testi- I fied, as the court will remember, to mauy important \ TRIAL OP THE; ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 191 facts against these conspirators and agents of Davis in Canada, amorg-cthers tbe terrible and fiendish plot disclosed by Thompson, Pallen and others, that they had ascertained the volume ot water in the reservoir supplying New York citv, estimated the quantity of poison required to render it deadly, and intended thus to poison a whole city— Conover returned to Canada, by direction of this court, for the purpose of obtaining certain documentary evidence. There, about the 9th of June, he met Beverly Tucker, Sanders and other conspirators, and conversed with them. Tucker de clared that [Secretary Stanton, whom he denounced as "a scoundrel " and Judge Holt, whom he called '¦' a bloodthirsty villain," -'could protect -themselves as long as they remained in office bya guard, but that would not always be the case, and. by the Eternal, he had a large account to settle with them." After this, the evidence of Conover here having been published, these parties called upon him and asked him whether hehad been to Washington, and had testifrad before this Court. Conover denied-it; they insisted, and took him to a room, where, with drawn pistols, they compelled him to consent to make an affidavit that he had been falsely personated here by another, and that he wouldmake that affidavit be fore a Mr. Kerr, who would witness it: They then called in Mr. Kerr to certify to the public that Cono ver had made such a denial. Tbey also compelled this witness to furnish for publication an advertise ment ofi'trmg a reward of five hundred dollars for the arrest of the'- infamous and perjured scoundrel" who had recently personated James W. Wallace under tbe name of Sandford Conover, and testified to a tissue of falsehoods beiore theMilitary Commission at Wash ington, which advertisement was published in the papers. ( To these facts Mr. Conover now testifies, and also discloses tbe fact tbat these same men published, in thftreport ofthe proceedings before Judge Smith an affidavit, purporting to be his, but which he never. made. The affidavit which he in fact made, and- which was published in a newspaper at that time, pro duced here, is set out substantially upon your record, ahd agrees with the testimony upon the same point given by him in this Court. To suppose that Conover ever made such an affida vit voluntarily as the one wrung irom him as stated Is impossible. Would he advertise for his own arrest, and charge himself with falsely impersonating him self? But the fact cannot evade observation that, when these guilty conspirators saw Conover's testi mony before this Court in the public prints, revealing to the worldtheatrocious plots ot these felon conspi rators, conscious ofthe truthfulness ot his statements, they cast about at once for some defense before the pubiic, and devised the foolish and stupid invention of compelling him to make an affidavit that he was not Saadiord Conover, was not in this Court, never gave this testimony, but was a practicing lawyer at Mon treal! This iniamous proceeding, coupled with the evidence be.'ore detailed, stamps tnese ruffian plotters with the guilt of this conspiracy. John Wilkes Booth having entered into this con spiracy in Canada, as has been shown, as early as Octo- ¦ ber, he is bext found in the city of New York, on the 11th day, as I claim, of November, In disguise, in con versation with another, the conversation disclosing to the witness, Mrs. Hudspeth, thai they bad some matter of personal interest between them; that upon one of them the lot had fallen to go to Washington; upon the other to go to Newbern-. This witness upon being shown thephotograph of Booth swears ''tnat the face-is the same" as that of one of those men, who she says was a man of education and culture, as appeared by his conversation, aud who had a scar like a bite near the aw bone. It is a fact proved here by tbe Surgeon- General, that Booth had a scar on the side of his neck. "Mrs. Hudspeth heard him say he would leave for' Washington tfieday aiterto-morrow. His companion appeared angry because it had not fallen on him to go to Washington. -This tobk place after the Presidential election in Noveriaber. Shecannotfix the precise date, butisays she was told General Butler left N ew York on that day. The testimony discloses that General But ler's army was on the 11th ot November leaving New "York. The register of the National Hotel shows that Booth left Washington on the early morning train, November 11, and that be returned to this city on the 14th. Chester testifies positively to Booth's presence In New York early1 in November. This testimony shows most conclusively that Booth was In New "Y ork on the nth of November. The early morning tram on which he left Washington would reaclfNew York early in the afternoon of that day. Chester saw him there early in November, and Mrs. Hudspeth not only identifies bis picture, but describes id's person. The scar upon his heck near his jaw was beculiar, and is well described by1 the witness as ljke a bite. On that day Booth had a letter in his possession which heaccidently dropped in the street carln the presence of Mrs, HudsDeth, the witness, who delivered It to Major-General Dix the same; day; 'and by whom, as his letter on fife before this Court shows, the same was transmitted to the War Department November 17, 18M That letter contains bhese words :— .Dear Louis:— The time has at last come that we bave all so wished for, and upon you every thing de- ; pends As itwas decided before you left, we were to ?£li ?£ts*T w® accordingly did so, and you are to be thoLharlotteCordayofthenineteenthcentury. When I you remember trie awful, solemn vow that was taken by us, you will feel there is no drawback, ^fcemust i ™e-,a°d nJ>w- You can choose your weapons— the cup, ! the kmfe.the bullet. Tbe cup failed us once, and might i again. Johnson, who will give this, has been like an enraged demon si»6e the meeting, because it has not fallen on him to rid the world of amonster. * * You know where to find your friends. Your disguises areso perfect and- 'complete, tbat without one knew your/ace, no police telegraphic despatch would catch you,. The English gentleman. Harcourt, must not act hastily. Remember, he has ten days. Strike for your home, strike for your country; bide your lime, but- strike sure. Get introduced; congratulate him; listea to his stories; {not many more will the brute tell to earthly friends.) do anything but fail, and riaeet us at the ap pointed place within the fortnight. You will probably, hear from me in Washington. Sanders is do; ng us no good in Canada Chas. Selby." The learned gentleman (Mr. Cox), in his very able and carefully cons.dered argument in deiense of O'Laughlin and Arnold, attached importance to this letter, and doubtless very ciearly saw its bearing upon tbe case, and, therefore, undertook to shbw that tho- witness, Mrs. Hudspeth, must be mistaken as to the person of Booth. The gentleman assumes that the letter ot General Dix, of the .17Lh of November last, transmitting this letter to the War Department* reads that the party who dropped the letter was heard to say that he would start to Washington on .Friday night next, although tbe word "next" is not in the letter, neither is it in the quotation which the gentleman makes, for he quotes it fairly; yet he concludes that _ this would be the 18th of November. Now the fact is, the lithof November last was -Fri day, and the register ot the National Hotel bears wit ness that Mrs. Hudspeth is not mistaken; because her language is, that Booth said he. would leave for Wash ington day after to-morrow, which would be Sunday, the 13th, and if in the evening, would bring him to Washington on Monday, the 14th of November, the day'on which the register shows he did return to the National Hotel. As to the improbability whicb the gentleman raises, on the conversation happening in a street car, crowded with people, there was nothing that transpired, although the conversation was ear nest, which enabled the wituess,vor could have ena bled any one, in the absence of this letter, or of the subsequent conduct of Booth, to form the least idea of the subject-matter of their con versation, ' The gentleman does not deal altogether fairly in his remarks touching the letter of General Dix; because, upon a careful examination of the letter, it will bo found that he did not form ;any such judgment as that it was a hoax for the Surtday Mercury , buthe took care to forward it to the Department; and asked attention to it: when, as appears by tlie testimony of the Assis-: tant Secretary of War, Mr. Dana, the letter was deli vered to Mr. Lincoln, who considered it important enough to indorse it with the word "Assassination," and file ib in his office, where itwas found a.ter the commission of this crime, aud brought into this Court to bear witness against his assassins. Although this letter would imply that the assassina tion spoken of was to take place speedily, yet the party was to bide his time. Though he had entered into the preliminary arrangements in Canada,, although con spirators had doubtless agreed to co-operate with him, in thecommission-of the-crime, and lots had been cast for the chief part fri the bloody drama, yet it remained! for him as the leader and principal of tbe hired assas sins, by whose hand their employers were to strike tbe murderous blow, to collect about him and bring to. Washiugton such persons as would be willing to lend; themselves, for a price, to the horrid crime, aud likely to give the necessary aid and support in its consume mation. The letter declares that Abraham Lincoln musb die, arid now, meaning as soon as the agents can be employed and the work done. To that end you will bide your time. But', says the gentleman, it could not have been the same conspiracy charged here- to which this letter re fers. Why not? It is charged here that Booth, with the accused and others, conspired to kiil and murder, Abraham Lincoln; that is precisely the conspiracy dis- * closed in the letter. Granted that the parties on trial had not then entered into the combination; if they at any time afterward entered into it they became parties to it, and tbe conspiracy was still the same. But, says the gentleman, the words of the letter imply that the conspiracy' was to be executed within the fortnight. Booth -is directed, by the name pf Louis, to meet the writer within a fortnight. It by no means- follows that be was tostrike within tbe fortnight because he was to meet his co-conspirator within that time, and any such, conclusion is excluded by the words, "Bide your time.'' Even if the conspiracy -was to be executed within the fortnight, and was nofcso executed, and the same party; Booth, afterwards by concert and agreement with the accused and others, did execute^^ by "striking sure" 192 TRIAL 01? THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTQTST. and killing the President, tbat rictj whenever done, would be but the execution of this same conspiracy. The letter is conclusive evidence of so much of this conspiracy as relates to tbe murder of President Lin coln, as Booth was to do anything but fail, he imme diately thereafter sought out the agents to enable him to strike sure, and execute all that he bad agreed with Davis and his co-confederaites in Canada todo—tomur- der the President, tbe Secretary of State, the Vice-Pre sident. General Grant and Secretary Stanton. Even Booth's co-conspirator, Payne, now on his trial, by h is tie. ense admits all this, and says Booth had just been to Canada, J'Was filled with a mighty scheme, and was lying In wait for agents." Booth asked, the co operation' of the prisoner Payne, and said:— "I will give you as much money as you want: but first you must swear to stick by me. It "is in tbe oil business." This you are told by theaccused was early in March last. Thus guilt bears witness against itself. .Wo fiud Booth in New York in November, Decem ber and January, urging Chester to enter into this com bination, assuring him that there was money indt; that they bad 'iriends on the other side:'-' that if he would only participate In it, he would never want for money while -he lived, and all that was asked of him was to stand at and open the back door of Ford's Tlicatre. Buoth, in bis interview witb Chester, confesses that he iiswithot.t money himself, and allows Chester to reim burse him the fifty dollars which he (Booth) had trans mitted to him in a letter ior the purpose of paying his expenses to Washington as one of the parties to this conspiracy. Booth told him, although he himself was penniless, "(here is money in this, we have friends on theother side." and'if you will but engage, I will bave three thousand dollars deposited at once for the use of your family. Failing to secure the services of Chester, because his soul recoiled with abhorrence from the foul work of assassina on and murner, he Bound more willing in struments in others whom he gathered about him. Men to commit the assassinations, horses flo secure speedy and certain escape were to be provided, and to t-has end Booth, with an energy worthy of abetter cause, applies himself. For this latter purpose he told Chester he had already expended §5000: In thelatler part of November. 18G4, be visits Charles county, Maryland, aud is in company with one of tbe prison ers, Dr. Samuel A, Mudd, with whom he lodged over night, and Lhrough whom he procures of Gardner one ofthe several horses which were at bis disposal, and used by him and his co-conspirators in Washing ton on the night of the assassination. Some time in January last, it is in testimony, that theprisoner Mudd introduced Booth to John H. Sur ratt and the witness Weichman; that Booth invited them to the National-Hotel: that when there, in the roam which Booth took them, Mudd went out into the passage, called Booth out-and had a privaceconversa- non with him. leaving the witness and Surratt inthe room. Upon their reiuin to the room Booth went out with Surratt, and upon their coming in al 1 three, Booth, Surratt, aud Samuel A. Mudd, went out together and had a conversation in the passage, leaving the wit ness alone. Dp to the time of this interview it seems that neither the witness nor Surratt had any know ledge of Booth, as they were then introduced to him byDr. Mudd. Whether Surratt bad in fact previously known Booth it is not important to inquire. Mudd deemed it necessary, perhaps, a wise precaution, to Introduce Surratt to Booth; he also deemed it neces sary to have a private conversation with Booth shortly afterwards, and directly upon that to have a conversa- tionaogcther wi tb Booth aud Su : ratt alone. , Had this conversation, no part of, which was heard by tho witness, been perfectly innocent, it is nob to be . presumed tiiat Dr. Mudd, who was an entire stranger to Wdchman. would bave deemed it necessary to hold tlie conversation secretly, nor to bavu volunteered to tell the wkn.ss, or rather pretend to tell him, what the conversation was; yet he did say to the witness, upon their return to the room, byway of apology. I suppose, for tho privacy oi' the conversation, that Booth bad some i-r.vate business with him.and wished to purchase his farm. This siiay device, as is often the case in attempts at deception, failed in the execution; for it remains to be euoton how tbe fact' that Mudd had private business with Booth, and that Booth wished to purchase his farm, made It at all Decesnaryor even proper tbat they should both volunteer to call out (Sur ratt, who up to that moment was arstranser to Booth What had Surratt to d6 with Boobh's purchase of Mudd's larm? And, if Itwas necessary to withdraw and talk by themselves secretly about the sale of the farm, why should they disclose the fact to the very man from whom they had concealed i i, v Upon the return of these three parties to the room, tbey seated themselves at a table, and upon the back of an envelone Booth traced lines with a pencil, indi cating, as the witness states* the direction, of roads. Why wflsithis. done? As Booth had been previously in that section of country, as the prisoner in his defense has taken great pains to show, it was certainly not necessary to anything connected with tbe purchase of Mudd's farm that at that time he should be Indicating tbe direction of roafpto or from It ; nor is it made to appear by anythlngHin this testimony, how it comes [ that Surratt, as the witness testifies, seemed tobe as much interested in the marking out of these roads as Mudd or Booth. It does not appear tbat Surratt was in any wise connected witb or interested in the sale of Mu da's farm. From all that has transpired si nee this meeting at the hotel, it would seem tbat this plotting the roads was intended, not so riiuch to show the road to Mudd's farm, as to point out the' shortest and sj^est route for flight from the Capital, by the houses ot all the parties in this conspiracy, to their " friends on the other side." But, says the learned gentleman (Mr. Ewing), in his very able argument in defense of this prisoner, why should Booth determine that his flignt should be througbCharles coun ty? The answer must be obvious, upon a moment's reflection, to every man, and could not possibly have escaped the notice of tbe counsel himself, but for the reason that bis zeal for his client constrained him to overlook it. It was absolutely es sential tbat this murderershould havehis co conspira tors at convenient- points along bis route, and it does not appear in evidence that by the route to his friends, who had then fled from Bichmond, which the gentle* man (Mr, Ewing) indicates as the more direct, but of which there is not the slightest evidence whatever, Booth had co-conspirators at an equal distance from Washington. Tne testimony discloses further, tbaton the route selected by h'm for bis flight, there as a large population that would be most likely to favor and aid bim in tbe execution- of bis wicked purpose, andin making bis escape. But it is a sufficient answer to the fentleman's question, that Booth's co-conspirator, fudd, lived in 'Charles county. To return to the meeting at tbe hotel. In the light of other, facts in this case.it must become clear to the Court that this secret meeting between Booth, Surratt and Mudd was a conference looking to tbe execution of this conspiracy. "It so impressed* the prisoner, it so impressod,his counsel, that they deemed it necessary and absolutely essential to their defense to .attempt to destroy the credibility ofthe witness Vv"eichman. I may say here, in passing, that they bave not at tempted to impeach his general reputation for truth. by tbe testimony of a single witness, nor have they impeached his testimony by calli ng a single witness to discredit one material fact to which be has testified iu this issue. Failiugtofind a breath of suspicion against Weichman's character, or to contradict a single tact to whicb be testified, the accused had to fly to the last resort, an alibi, and very earnestly did tbe learned counsel devote himself to the task. It is not material whether this meeting in the hotel took place on the 2^d of December or iu January. But, says the counsel, it was after the commencement or eloseof the Congressional holiday. That is not ma terial; buttbecoucurrentresolution of Congress shows that the holiday commenced on the 22d December, the day before the accused spent the evening in Washing ton. Tne witness is not certain about the date of this meeting. The material fact is, did this meeting take place— either on tbe 23d of December or in January* last? Were the private interviews there held, and was theapologymude, as detailed, by Mudd and Booth alter the secret conference to tne witness? Tbat the meeting did lake place, and that. Mudd did explain that these 6ecret interviews, with Booth first, and with Booth and Surratt directly afterward, had rela tion to the sale of his farm, is coniessedly admitted by tbe endeavor of the prisoner, through his counsel, to show that negotiations had been going on between Booth and Mudd for the sale of Mudd's farm. If no such meeting was held, if no such explanation was made, by Mudd to Weichmah, can any man fbr a moment believe that a witness would have been called here to give any testimony, about Booth having nego tiated for Mudd's farm? What conceivable cpnneo- tion has it with this case, except to show that Mudd's, explanation to Weichman lor bis extraordinary con duct was in exact accordance with the fact? Or was this testimony about the negotiations for Mudd's farm iutended to show so close au intimacy and inter course with Booth that Mudd could not fail to recog nize him when he came flying for aid to his house from the work of assassination? It would be injustice to tbe able counsel to suppose that. •* I have said tbat it was wholly Immaterial whether this conversation took place on the 2M of December or in January; it is in evidence that in both those months Booth was at the National Hotel; that he occupied a room there; that he arrived there on the 22dahd was thereon the 2iid of December Jast. and also outhel2th day of January. The testimony of the.witness is, that Bootbsaid he had justconae in. Supritase this conver sation took place in December, on the evening of the 23d, the time when it- is proved by J, T, Mudd, the wit ness for tbe accused, that he. in company with Samuel A. Mudd, spent the nigbtin Washington city. IS there anything in the testimony ofthat or any other witness to show that the accused did not' have and could not have have had an interview witb Booth on that even ing? J. T. Mudd testifies that he separated from the prisoner, Samuel A. Mudd, at the National Hotel, early ha the evening of that day, and did not meet him again until the accused came in fbr the night at the Pennsylvania House, where be stopped. Where was TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 193 Dr. Samuel, A. Mudd during, this interval? What does his witne-s know about him during that time? How can ne say that Dr. Mudd did not go up on , Seventh street in company with Booth., then at tbe National: tbat he , did not, on Seventh street, meet Surratt and Welchmap: that he did not return to the National Hot^l; that be did not have this interview, and after wards meet him. the witness, as he testifies, at the Pennsylvania House? Who knows that the Congres sional holiday had not, in fact, commenced on that day? What witness has been called to prove that Booth did not on either of those occasions occupy the- yqom tbat had formerly been occupied by a member of Congress, who bad temporarily vacated it, leaving his hooks there? Weichman, I repeat, is not positive as to tne date. he is only positive as to the fact; and be disclosed vo luntarily, to this Court, that the date could probably befixed by a reference to the register of the Pennsyl vania House. That register cannot, of course, be con clusive of whether Mudd wag there i.i January or not, for the very good reason, that tbe proprietor admits ^hab be did not know Samuel A. Mudd; therefore, Mudd might have registered by any other name. Weichman doe3 not pretend to know that Mudd had registered at all. If Mudd was here in January, as a party to this conspiracy, it is not at all unlikely that, if be did register at that time in the presence ot a man to whom be was wholly unacquainted, .his kiDsman not then being with him, he would register by a false name. But if the interview took place in December, the tes timony of Weichman bears as strongly against the ac cused as it it had happened in January. Weichman says he does not know what time was occupied i n this interview at UieNatiooal Hotel; tfcatitprob.ibly lasted twenty minuses; UnataiVer the private interviews be tween Mudd, andvSurratt, and Booth, which were not ofi very Ion? duration, had terminated, the parties went to the Pennsylvania House, where Dr. Mudd had rooms,1 nd after sitting together in the common sit ting-room ofthe hotel, they left Dr. Mudd thereabout \Q o'clock P. M., who remained during .the night. Weichman's testimony leaves no doubt that this meet ing on Seventh street and interview atthe National took place alter dark, and terminated beiore or about 10 o'clock L\ M, His own witnoss,* J. T. Mudd, after stating that he separated from the accused at the Na tional Hotel, says after be had got through a conver sation with a gentleman of his acquaintance, he walked down the Avenue, went to several clothing stores, and "after a while" walked round to, the Pennsylvania House, and "verv soon after" he got there Dr. Mudd ¦came in. and they went lo bed shortly aiterwards. What time he spent in his 'walk alone" on the Ave nue, looking atciothing; what period he embraces in -the terms "after a while," when he returned to the Pennsylvania House, and "soon after" which. Dr. Mudd got tnere, tho witness does not disclose. Neither doe3 he intimate, much less testily, that he saw Dr. Mudd when he first entered the Pennsylvania House on tbat night after their separation. How docs, he know that Booth and Surratt and Weichman did not accompany Samuel A. Mudd to that bouse tbat eve ning? How does he kpuw that the prisoner and those persons did not converse together some time in the Sitting room of the Pennsylvania Hotel? Jeremiah Mudd has not testiiicd that he met Dr. Mudd in that room, or that he was in it himself. He has, however, sworn to the fact, which is dis proved by no one, that the prisoner was separated fromhiai long enough that evening to have had the meeting witb Booth. Surratt and Weichman. and tbe interviews in the National Hotel, and at the Pennsyl vania House, to which Weichman has testified. Who Is there to disprove it? Of what importance is it whether it was on the 23d day of December or in Janu ary? How does, that affect the credibility of Weich man? He is a m;ui, as I have before said, against ¦Whose reputation lor trutb andgood conduct tbey have ' nob been able to bring one witness. If this meeting did by possibility take place tbat night, is there any thing to render it improbable that Booth, and Mudd, and Surratt did have the conversation at the.Nat.oual •Hotel to whicb Weichman testifies? Or what avail, therefore, is the attempt to prove that Dr. Mudd was not here during January, if it was clear that be was hereon the 23d of December, lSG-l, and had this conver sation with Buocb? That this attempt to prove au alibi during January has taiied, is quite as clear as the ©roof of the fact that the prisoner was here on tbe eve ning of the 23d of December, and present in the Na tional Hotel, where Booths-topped. - The laet that tne prisoner, Samuel A. Mudd, went with J T. Mudd on that evening to the National Hotel and there separated from him, is proved by his own witness, J. T. Mudd; and that he did not rejoin him until tbey rebired to bed in the Pennsylvania f Cause is nroved by tbe same witness, and contradicted v 'nobody. Does any one suppose there would have been such assiduous care to prove that the prisoner •wm with bis kinsman all tbetimeon the 23d ol Deceni- beifin Washington, if they had not known that Booth was then at tne National Hotel, aud that ; a meeting of toe prisoner with Booth, Surratt aud Weichman on that day would corroborate and confirm Weichman's testimony in every material statement he made con cerning that meeting? The accused having signally failed to account for his absence alter heseparated from his witness, J-T. Mudd. early in, the evening ofthe 23d of December, at the Na tional Hotel, until they had again met at tbe Pennsyl vania House, when they retired to re=-t, he now at tempts to prove an alibi as to the month of January. In this.he has failed, as he failed in the attempt to show that he could not have met Booth, Surratt and Weich man on tbe 23d of December. For this purpose Unaccused callgBetty Washington. She had been at Mudd's house every night since the Monday after Christinas last, except when here at Court,.and says that the prisouer, Mudd, has only been away from home three nights during, that time. This witness forgets that Mudd has not been at borne any night or day since this Court assembled. Neither does she account for tbe three nights in which she swears to his absence from home. First, she says he went to Gardner's party* second, he went to Oiesboro', then to Washington. She does not know in what month he, was away, the second time, all night. She only knows where he went, from what he and his wi.e said, which is not evidence: but she does testily that when be left home and was absent overnight, the second time, it was about two' or tbree weeks after she came to hia house, which would, if it were tbree weeks,, make it just about the loth of January., 1SU5. because she swears she came to his house on the first Monday after Christ-- mas last, which was the 26th day of December; so that the 15th of January would bet lire -weeks, less one day from, tbat time; and it might have been a w^ek earlier, according to her testimony; as, also, it might have been a week earlier, or more, by Weichman's testis ' mony, for he is not positive a 3 to the time. What I have said of the. register ofthe Pennsylvania House, the head-quarters of Mudd and Atzeroth, I need not here repeat. That record proves nothing* save that Dr. Mudd was there on the 23a of December, Which, as we have seen, is a fact, along with others,1 to show that the meeting at f he National then toolc place. I have also calledthe attention of the Court to the fact that if Mudd was at the house again in Janu ary, and did hot register his name, the fact proves nothing; or, if be did, the register only Droves thab he registered falsely; either of which facts might have happened without the knowledge ofthe witness- called by the accused from that house, who does not know Samuel A. Mudd personally. S The testimony of Henry L. Mudd, his brother,; in support of thi-- alibi, is that the prisoner was in Wasbt ington on the 23d of Marah and on the 10th of April, four days before the murder! But he does not account lor the absent night in January, about which Betty Washington testifies. Thomas Davis was called forthe same purpose, but staLed that be was himself absent one night in January, after the Oth of that month, and be could not say whether Mudd was there on that night or not. He does testify to'Mudd's absence over night tbree times, and fixes one occasion on the night oi the 2uthof Januarv; -this witness cannot account forthe absence of Mudd on the night referred to by Betty This matter is entitled to no further attention. It can satisfy no one, and the burden of proof is_upon the prisoner bo prove that be was not in Washingtou.in January last. Howcansuch testimony convince any rational man that Miidd was not here ia January, against the evidence of an unimpeached Witness, who swears that Samuel A. Mudd was in Washington in the month bf January? Who, that has been examined here as a witness, knows that ho was not? The Be v. Mr. Evans swears that be saw him in Washington last winter, and that at the same time he saw Jarbee. the one coming out qf, aud the other going into, a house on H street, which he was iniormed, on inquiry, was the house cl Mrs. Surratt. Jarboe is the only witness called 'to contradict Mr. Evans, and he leaves it in extreme doubt whether he does not cor roborate him, as he swears that he was here himself last winter oV fall, but cannot state exactly the time, Jarboe's silence on questions touching hi* own credi bility leaves no room to"r any one to say ^bat his testi mony could mapeach Mr. Evans, whatever he might swear aiiss Anna H, Surratt is also called for the purpose offmBeachmgMr. Evans. It is sufficient to say ot her teitimony on that point that she swears negatively only, that; she did not see either of the persons, named at her mother's house. This testimony neither dis. proves, nor does it even tend to disprove, the tact put in issue by Mr. Evans. No one will pretend, whatever the form of her expression in giving her testimony, that she could say more than that she dm notknow the fact, as'it was Impossible that she could know .who was or who was not, at her mother's house, casually, at a period so remote, if 19 no' W pnrposet neither is U needful here, to question in any way the integrity nf thin voung woman. It Is further in testimony that Samuel A. Mudd was here on the Sd day of March .last, the day preceding the inauguration, when Booth, was tostrikethe traitor ous blow; and it was, doubtless, only by the interpo- 194 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. sition ofthat God who stands Within *the shadow and keeps watch above His own, that the victim of this conspiracy was spared that day from the assassin's ¦band, that he might complete his work and see the salvation of his country in the fall of Bichmond and the surrender of its great army. Dr. Mudd was here on that day (the 3d of March), to - abet, to encourage, to nerve his co-conspirator for" the 'commission of this great crime. Hewas carried away by the awful pur pose which possessed him, and rushed into the roomof Mr. Norton, at the National Hotel, in search of Booth, exclaiming excitedly, "I'm mistaken; I -thought this was Mr. Booth's room." He is told Mr. Booth is above, on the next floor. He is followed by Mr. Norton, be cause of his rude and excited beaavior, and. being fol lowed, conscious of his guilty errand, he turns away, afraid of himself and afraid to be found in concert with his fellow confederate. Mr. Norton identifies the pri soner, and has no doubt that Samuel A. Mudd is tbe man.1 Tbe Rev. Mr. Evans also swears tbat, after the 1st and before the 4th day of March last, he is certain that within that time, and on the2tlor3dof March, he saw Dr. Mudd drive into Washi ngton'City. The endeavor Is made by the accused, in order to break down this witness, by proving another alibi. The sister of the accused, Miss Fanny Mudd. Is called. She testifies that she saw theprisoner at breakfast in ber father's house on the 2d of March, about five o'clock in the morning, and not- again until tbe 3d of March at noon. Mrs. Emily Mudd swears substantially to the same Btatement. Betty Washington, called for the accused, swears that he was at home all day at work with her on the 2d of March, and toolc breakfast at home. Frank Washington swears that Mudd was at home all day; that he saw bim when he first came out In the morning, about sunrise, from his' own house, and knows that be was there all day with them. Whicb is correct, the testimony ofhissister3 or the testimony of servants? The sisters say tbat he was at their father's house for breakfast on the morning ofthe 2d of March; the servants say he was at home lor breakfast with them on that day. If this testimony is followed it proves one alibi too much. It is impossible, in the nature of things, tbat the testimony of all these four witnesses can be true. ¦ x Seeing this weakness in the testimony brought to Srove this second alibi, the endeavor Is next made to iscredit Mr. Norton for truth; and two witnesses, not more, are called, who testify that bis reputation for truth has suffered by contested litigation between one or the impeaching witnesses and others. Four' wit nesses are called, who testify that Mr. Norton's repu tation for truth is very -rood; that he is a man ofhigh character for truth, and entitled to be believed whe ther he speaks under the obligation of an oath or not The late Postmaster-General. Hon. Horatio King, not only sustains Mr. Norton as a man of good reputation for truth, but expressly Corroborates his testimony, by stating that in March last, about the 4th of March, Mr Norton told bim the same fact to which he swears here— that a man came into his room under excite ment, alarmed his sister, was followed out bv him self; and went down stairs instead of going up; and that Mr. Norton told him this before the assassination, and about the time of the'ioauguratioh What ; motive had Mr. Norton at that time to fabri cate this statement? It detracts nothing from his tes timony that he did not at that time mention the name pf this man tp his friend, Mr. Kiug; bee uise it appears tromhis testimony, and there is none toauestion the truthfulness ot his statement, that at that time he did not know his name. Neither does it take from the fo:ce of this testimony, that Mr. Norton did not, in communicating this matter to Mr. King, make mention of Booth's name; because there was nothing inthe transaction at the time, he being ignorant ofthe name' pi Mudd, and equally ignoranb of the conspiracy be tween Mudd and Booth, to give the least occasion for any mention of Booth or of the transaction further t,La?*uJ3, det,ailed }*>• t With such corroboration, whocan doubt tbe fact that Mudd did enter the room of Mr. Norton, and was followed by him. on tlie 8d,of March last? Can he be mistaken In the man? Who ever looks at the prisoner carefully once will be sure to recognize him again. * For the present I pass from the consideration of the testimony showing Dr. Mudd's connection with Booth hi this conspiracy, with the remark that it is in evi dence, and I think established, both bv the testimony adduced by theprosecution and tbat by the prisouer. that since the commencement of this Rebellion John H. Surratt visited the prisoner's house; that he con cealed Surratt and other Rebels and traitors In the woods near his house, where for several days he fur nished them with lbod and bedding; that the shelter of the woods by night and by day was the only shelter that the prisoner dare furnish those jriends of his; that In November Booth visited bim and remained over night! that he accompanied Bootji at that time to Gardner's, from whom he purchased one of the horses bsed on the night of the assassination to aid the escape of one of his confederates; that the prisoner bad secret interviews with Booth and Surratt, as sworn to by the witness, Weichman, Id the National Hotel* whether on tne 23d of December or In January, is a matber of entire indifference; that he rushed into Mr. Norton's room on the 3d of March in search of Booth, andj tbat he was here again on the lbth of April, four days be fore tbe murder .of the Eresident. ' Of his conduct after the assassination ofthe Presi dent, which isconfirmatory of all this; his conspiring with Booth, and his sheltering, concealing, and aiding the flight of his co-conspirator, 'this fuloo assassin, I shall speak hereafter, leaving him for the present with the remark that the attempt to prove his character has resulted Inshowing him in sympathy with the Re bellion, so cruel that be shot one of hisslaves, and de clared his purpose to send several of them to work on the Rebel batteries in Richmond. Wbat others, besides Samuel A, Mudd and John H. Surratt and Lewis Payria, did Booth, after his return from Canada, induce to join him in this conspiracy to murder thePresident, the Vice President, the Secre tary of State and the Lieu tenant-General, with the in tent thereby to aid the Rebellion and-'overthrow the Government and laws of the United States? Gn tbe 10th of Februarv the prisoners Arnold and O'Laughlin came to Washington and took roomsin the house of Mis. Vantyne; were armed; were there visited frequently by John Wilkes Booth, and alone; were occasionally absent whea Booth called, who seemed anxious for their return; would sometimes leave notes for them, and sometimes a request that when they came in they should be told to come to the stable. On the 18th of March last, when Booth played in The Apostate; the witness, Mrs. Vantyae. received from O'Laughlin complimentary tickets, 'ihese persons remained there until the toth of March. They were visited, so far as tbe witness knows, during their stay at her house only by Booth, save tbat on a s:ngle oef- casion an Uuknown* man came tosee ,6hem, and re mained with them over night. They Bold the witness they were in the "oil business." With Mudd, the guilty purpose was sought to be concealed by de claring that he was in the "land business;" witb O'Laughlin and Arnold it was attempted to be con cealed by pretense that they were in the 'oil busi ness." Booth, it is proved, bad closed up all connec tion witu the oil business last September. There is not a word of testimony to show that theaccused, O'Laughlin and Arnold, ever invested or sought to in vest, in any way or to auy amount, in the oil business: their silly words betray them; they forgot when they utbered that false statement that the truth is strong, next to tbe Almighty, and that their crime must find them out was the irrevocable and irresistible law of nature and ofnatuae's-God. One of their co-conspirators, known as yet only to the guUty parties to this damnable plot and to the In finite, who will unmask and avenge all blood-guilti ness, comes to oear witness, unwittingly, against them. This unknown conspirator, who dates his let ter at South Branch Bridge, April 6. 1SG5, mailed ahd postmarked Cumberland, Maryland, and addressed to John Wilkes Booth, by his initials, "J. W. B., National Hotel, Washington, D; C." was also in the "oil specu lation." In that letter he says:— " Friend Willies : I received yours of March 12, and reply as soon as practicable. I saw French, Brady, and others about the oil speculation. The subscription to tbe stock amounts to eight thousand dollars, and I add one thousand myself, which is about all I can stand. Now, when you sink your well go deep enough; don't fail; everything depends upon you and your helpers. If you cannot get through on your tf-ip, after you strike oil, strike through Thornton Gap and across by Capon, llomney.aud down the Branch. I can keep yousafeironaa 1 hardships for a year. I am clear of all surveillance now that infernal Purdy is beat. # * * * * -j- * * " I send this by Tom, and, if he don't get drunk, you will get it- the Uth. At all events, it cannot be under stood if lost. * * . * ¦ * ¦ * * "No more, only Jake will be at Green's with the funds. LON." That this letter is not a fabrication is made appa rent by the testimony of Purdy, whose name occurs in the letter. He testified that he had been a detective in the Government service, and that he had boeu talsely accused, as tne letter recites, and put under arrest; that there was a noted Bebel by the nauae of Green, living at Thornton Ga-.: that there was a servant, who drank, known as "Tom." in the neighborhood of South Branch Bridge; that there is an obscure route through the Gap, and as described in the letter; and that a man commonly called "Lon" lives at Soulh Branch Bridge. If the Court are satisfied, and ifis for them to jud^e, that this letter was written before the assassina tion, as it purports to have been, aud on the day of its date, there can be no question witb any one who reads It that the writer was in the conspiracy, and kuew that the time of its execution drew nigh.' If aconspirator every word of its contents is evidence against every otber'party to this conspiracy. Who can fail to understand this letter? His words "go deeo enough.'' "don't fall," "everything depends on you and your helpers," "if you can't get through on your trip after you strike oil, strike through Thornton Gap," &c.,,.and "i can keep ypu safe from all hurd- ships for a year," necessarily imply that when be TRIAL OF THE' ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 195 "strikes oi!". there will be an occasion for a' flight: that a trip, or route, has already been determined upon ; tbatuemcy notbeableto go through bythat route; in which event he is to strike for Thornton Gap. and across by Capon and Roroney, and down the Branch, for the .shelter which his co-couspirator pliers him. ' I am clear ot all surveillance now/' Does any one doubt that the man who wrote those words wished to assure Booth that he was no longer watched, and that Booth. could safely hide with him from his pursuers? Does anv one doubt, from the further expression in this letter. "Jake will be at Green's with the funds," tha* this wns ft part ofthe price of blood, or that the eight thousand dollars subscribed by others, and the one thousand additional, subscribed by the writer, were also a part of the price to be paid? "The oil business" which was the declared business ofO'Laushlinand Arnold, was the declared ousiness ofthe infamous writer of this letter; was thedeclared business of John II. Surratt; was the declared business of Booth himself, as explained to Chester and Hess and Pavne: was "the business" referred to In histograms to O'Laughlin, and meant the murderof the Presideut, of his Cabinet, and of General Grant. Thefirst of these telegrams is dated Washington, isth March, and is ad dressed to M. O Laughlin, No. 57 North Exeter street, Baltimore, Maryland, and is as fo! lows: "Don't you fear to neglect your business; you had better come on at once. J. Booth." The telegraph operator, Hoffman, who sent this despatch from Washinfiton, swears that John Wilkes Booth delivered it to him in person on the dav of its date; and the handwriting of the original telegram is established beyond question to be that of Booth. The other telegram is dated Washington, March 27, addressed "M. O'Laughlin. Esq., 57 North Exetet street, Baltimore, Maryland," and is as fol lows;— "Get word to Sam. Come on with or without him on Wednesday morning. We sell • that day sure; don't laii. J. Wilkes Booth." The original of this telegram is also proved to be in the handwriting of Booth. The sale referred to jn this last telegram was doubtless the murder ofthe President and others, the ''oil speculation," in which the writer ot the letter from South Branch Bridge, dated April 0, had taken a thousand dollars, and in which Booth said there was money, and Sanders said there was money, and Atzeroth said there was money. The words of this telegram, '-get word to Sam," meaning Samuel Arnold, his co-couspirator; who had been with him durmg all his stay at Washington, at Mrs. Vanty lie's. These parties to this conspiracy, alter they had gone to Baltimore, had additional correspondence witli Booth, which the Court must Infer had relation to carrying out the purposes of their coniederation and agreement. The colored witness. Williams, testifies tbat John Wilkes Booth handed him a loiter for Michael O'Laughlin, and another ror Samuel Arnold, in Baltimore, sometime in March last; one of which he delivered to O'Laughlin at tbe theatre in Baltimore, and the other to a lady at tbe door where Arnold boarded in Baltimore. ¦ Their agreement and co-operation iri tbe common object having been thus established, the letter writ ten to Booth by the prisoner Arnold, dated March 27, 1S65, the handwriting of which is proved before the Court, and which was found in Booth's possession after the assassination, becomes testimony against O'Laughlin, as well as against the writer, Arnold, be cause it is an act done in furtherance of their combi nation. That letter is as follows:— "Dear John:— Was business so important that you could not remain in Baltimore till I saw you? I came In as soon as I could, but-found vou had gone to Wash ington. I called also to see Mike, but learned i rom his mothefthat he had gone out with you and had not re turned. I concluded, therefore, he had gone with you. How inconsiderate you have been! When I lelt you, you stated that we would not meet in a month or so, and therefore I made- application for employment, an answer to which I shall receive during the week. I told mv parents I had ceased with you. Can I. then, under existing circumstances, act as you i equest? l ou know full well that the Government suspicions some thing is going on there, thereiore the undertaking is be coming more complicated. Why not, for tlie. present-, desist? For various reasons, which, if you look into, you can readily see without my making any mention feerebf, you, nor any one, can censure me ior my pre sent course. You have been its cause, ior how can 1 , now come after telling them I had lelt you? Suspicion rest3 upon me now from my whole family ana even parties in the country. "1 wlllbe compelled to leave homeany how, ana how soon I care not. None, no not one, were more in ;avor ofthe enterprise than myself, and to-day would be there, had you not done as you have. By this, I mean manner of proceeding. I am, as you well know, in heed. I am, you may say, in rags, whereas, to-day, i ought to be well clothed. I do not feel right stalking about w;th means, and more from appearances a beggar I feel mv dependence. But, even all this wouldbave been and was.fbrgorten.lbr JiwwonewJOli/oi*. Time taoranrOnitious will arrive yet. Do notactrashlyonn haste. I would prefer your first, query, -Go and see *0W it will be taken in Bichmond ' and. ere Urns, Ishall be hetter prepared to again bewithybu. I dislike writing. Would sooner verbally make1 known my views. "Yet your now waiting causes me thus to proceed Do not in anger peruse this. Weigh all I have said, and, asa rational man and a friend. you cannotcensure or up braid my conduct. I sincerely trust this, norlaughtelse that shall or may occur, will ever be an obstacle to ob literate our former friendship and attachment. Write me to Baltimore, asl expect to be in about Wednesday or Thursday; or, if you can possibly come on, I will Tuesday meet you..at Baltimore at B. "Ever, I subscribe myself, your friend, _ "SAM." » Here is the confession of the prisoner Arnold, that ¦ he was one with Booth in this conspiracy; the further coniesion that they are-suspected by tbe Go vernment of their country, and the acknowledgment that, since they parted, .Booth had communicated, amongst other things, a suggestion which leads to tbe remark in this letter, " I would prefer your first query, -Go see how it will betaken at Richmond,' and ere long t shall be better prepared to again be with you." This is a declaration that affects Arnold, Booth and O'Laughlin alike, if the court ~are satisfied, and it is difiicultt i see how they can have doubtion the subject, that the matter to be referred to Richmond is the mat ter of the assassination of thePresident and others, to effect which tbese parties bad previously agreed ahd conspired together. It is a matter in testimony, by the declaration of John H. Surratt, who is as clearly proved to have been in this conspiracy and mur der as Booth himself, that about the very date of this letter, the 27th of March, upon (lie suggestion of Booth, and with his know ledge and consent, he went to Richmond, not only to see "bow itwouid be taken there," but to get funds with which to ca: ry out the enterprise,, as Booth nad already declared to Chester in one of his last inter views, when he said that he or "some, one of the party"' would be constrained lo go to Richmond for lunds to carry out the conspiracy. Surratt returned from Richmond, bringing with him some part of the money for which he went, and was then going to Canada, and. as the testimony discloses, bringing with him the despatches from Jefferson Davis to nis chief agents in Canada, which, as Thompson declared to Conover. made the proposed assassination "all right;" Surratt, after seeing the parties here, left immediately lor Canada, and delivered his despatches to Jacob Thompson, the agent of Jef!R?rson Davis. This was dona by Surratt upon the suggestion*, or in exact ac cordance with the suggestion, of Arnold, made on the 27th of March, in bis letter to Booth, just read, and yet you are gravely told that four weeks before the 27th of March Arnold had abandoned the conspiracy. Surratt reached Canada with these despatches, as we have seeD. about the 6th or 7th of April last, when the witness, Conover, saw them delivered to Jacob Thompson, and heard their contents stated by Thomp son aud, tlie declaration from him that these des patches made it "all right."' That Surratt was at that time in Canada, is not only established by the testi mony of Conover, out it is also in evidence that he told Weichman, on the 3d of April, that he was going to Canada, and on that day left for Canada, and alter- wards two letters addressed by Surratt, over the ficti tious signature of John Harrison, to his mother and tb Miss Ward, dated at Montreal, were received by therh. on the 14th of April, as testified by Weichman and by, Miss Ward, a witness called for the defense. Thus it appears that the condition named by Arnold in his let ter had been complied with. Booth had "gone to Richmond" in the person of Surratt, "to see how it would be taken." The Rebel aiithori.ies at Richmond hadanpproved it, the agent had returned: and Ar nold was, in his own words, thereby the better pre" pared to rejoin Booth in the prosecution of this con- To this end Arnold went to Fortress Monroe. As his letter expressly declares, Booth said when they parted, -we would not meet in a month or so, an& thereforel made application for employment— an answer to which I shall receive during the week." He did re ceive the answer that week from Fortfe-s Monroe. and went there to await the "more propitious time," bearing with him the weapon bf death which Booth had provided, and ready to obey his call, as the act had been approved at Richmond, and been made "all right '' Acting upon the same fact that the conspiracy had been approved in Rtphmond, and the funds pro vided O'Laughlin came to Washington to identity General Grant, the person who was to become the victim of his violence in the final consummation of this crime-General Grant whom, as is averred inthe specification, it had become the part ot O Laugblin by his agreement in his conspiracy, to kill and. mondnfe evening preceding the assassination, the 13th of ADr?l by "be testimony of tbree reputable'1 wit nesses, against whose truthfulness not one word is ut- terednere or elsewhere, O'Laughlin went into the house of the Secretary. of War, whereGeneral Grant then was and placed himself in position m the hall where he could see him, haying declared before he reached that point to one of these witnesses that be 196 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. wished to see General Grant. The house was brij- liantiy illuminated at thp time; two, at least, of the — ¦ conversed with the accused, ana the other jBtopd very near to hina, took special notice of hia con duct, called attention ,tojt^ and suggested that be he . put out of the house, and he was accordingly put oiit by one ofthe witnesses. These witnesses' are confident and have no doubt, and so swear mpoh the,ir oaths. that Michaetl O'Laughlin is the ?nan who was present jOHjtl-jat.QCcasion. , < ' , There is no denial on the.part of the accused that he was in "Washington during-the day and during the night » of April 13, and also during the day ahd during the night of *tnell4thj' and yet, to get rid of this testimony* (re course is had to that common device,— an alibi;' a de vice never,.! may say, more frequently resorted to than in this t^rial. B;ut what an alib}/ Nobody is called! to prove ijt, sayeqome men who, by their own testi raouy ,were engaged ' n a drunk en debauch through "the eyehing.' A reasonable man who reads their evi dence can liardly-be expected to a(low it, to outweigh the uuited testimony of three unimpeached and upim- rpeachable witnesses, who were clear in their stater ,inept£, who entertain no doubt of the truth of what tbey say, whose opportunities to know. were full and complete, and who were constrained to take special .notice of theprisoner by reason of his extraordinary conduct. These witnesses describe accurately tbe appearance, -stature and coinplexion of the accused, but, because they describe bis clothing as dark or black, it -is urged that as part of his clothing although dark, was not hlack, the witnesses; are mistaken. O'Laughlin amj njs drunken companions (one of whom swears thatjie -drapk ten, times that, evening) were' strolling in Hue streets aud in the direction of the house of the Secre tary of War up thS avenue: but you are asked tp be lieve that these witijesses could not. be mistaken in .saying they were nop off the Ayenue. above Seventh -street, or on K street. I venture 'to say that no mah who reads their testimony cau determine satisfacto rily all tbe places tbat were visited by O'Laughlin and his drunken associates that evening from seven to eleven P.M., All this time, from seven to eleven P. M., must pe accounted for satisfactorily before an apibicon be established. Laughjih.does not account for ail the time, for he left O'Laughlin, alter seven o clock, and ,1-ejo-ned him, as lite says, "I suppose .about qight o'clock,"' Gril/et did not. meet bim uutil half-past ten, and, then onlyj casually sawhim 'Ip pass ing the hotel. May not Gnllet have boon mistaken as ,to the .fact, although*; he. .did meet O Laughlin after eleven o'clock, the same evening, as he swears? Purdy swears to seeing him in the bar with Griliet about half-past 10, but, as we have'see'n.by Grillct's tes timony it must have been after II o'clock. Murphy contradicts, as to time, botb Grilfec and Purdy, for be says it Was half-past li or iz o'clock when he and O'Laughlin returned to Bull-man's from Plate's; and Eaj-Jy swears theaccused wentfrom Bull man's to Se cond street to a dance about a quarter past li o'clock, when O'Laughlin took the lead in the dance, and stayed ,aboutpuehour. I follow these witnesses no further They contradict each other, and do not account for O'Laughlin all tbe time from 7 to If o'clock. I repeat .that ho man can road their testimony without findlh-r ,contradict:onS most material as to time., aud comingto the conviction that they utterly fail to account for O'Laughlin's whereabouts on that evening. To esta blish an aiibi the witnesses must know the fact and tes tify lo it. O'Laughlin. Griliet, Purdy, Murphy and Early utterly lail to prove it. and drily succ Ad in show ing that th,eydid not know, wflere O'Laughlin was all this time, and that some 'of them were grossly mistaken in what they testified, both as tp time andpincei > , The testimony of Jjime3 B. Henderson is equally un- satisiactory. He is poutrarticted by other testimony of the accused as to ptare.'- He says O'Laughlin went up the avenue above Seventkstre.et, but that ho did notgo to Ninth street. The other witnesses swear be went to .Ninth street. He swears be went to the Canterbury abut 9 o'clock, alter tfoing back from Seventh street tolluUnian's. Laughlin swears that O'Laughlin was \yilh him at the corner of the avenue and JNirn It street at y o ciock, and went from, there to Canterbury, while Early swears that O'Laughlin weht up as far as Eleventh street, and returned and tooksupper witiv him at w,clcker's about 8 o'clock. If these wltneW-- proveaufli.&i, it is really a^ui-ist each other. Itlsfofy topreteud that they prove, facts which make * 1 impos sible that, O'Laughlin cujild have been at tho hmVie of Secretary Htantqh, as thr,ee witnesses .'-wear hewas, on the evening of the ,13th of April, looking for General .Gram. • ¦ . Has it npt, by the testimony, thus reviewed, been ea- tablishea^-pj-imd/flr/e that iqthe months-of Lcoruary March and Apr*! O'Laughlin had combined-, ooiileue- rated and agreed with John Wilkes Booth and Samuel Arnold to kill^and murder Abraham i ucolh. Wilbain H. Seward, Andrew 'Johnson and Ulysses S. Grant? Is It not established. beyond a Bbadow of doubt, that Booth ,had so conspired with the Rebel agents in Ca nada as early as October last; that lie was in search of agents to do the work on pay, I|i the interests ot the Bebellion, and thut in this speculation Arnold and O'Laughlin had joined as Oarly aa February, nud then, and aftejTt with Booth and Surratt, they were In the "oil business," which was the business of assassination by contract as a speculation? If this conspiracy on the part of O'Laughlin with Arnold is established even prima facie, the declarations ahd acts of Arnold 'and Booth, tbe other conspirators, in furtherance of .the common design, is evidence against O'Laughlin as well as'agairist Arnold himself or the other parties'. 'Tlie rule of law is that the act or declaration of one cdnsbirator, dom/in pursuance or furtherance of the common design, is the act or declaration of all the conspirators.1 (1 -Wharton; 706). , The letter-, tb'ejeiore, of his co-conspirator,- Arnold* is evidence-again st O'Laughlin, because it is an aat iu the prosecution 'or thecommon'conspiracy. suggesting what Should bOddae in order to make it elective, and which suggestion, as has been stated, was followed out. The^defehsp has attempted to avoid the force of this letter by recltincrthe statement of Arnold, made to Horner &tfn£ time he was arrested, in whicb he declared, among other things, that the purpose was to abduct President Lincoln and take him South; that it was, to be done at the theatre by throwing the Presir- dent out of the box upon the floor of the stage, when the accused was to catch him. The very announce ment of this testimony excited derision that such a tragedy meant only to take the President and darry him gently away! This -pigmy.to catch the glanf-» the assassins hurled him to the floor lrom an eleva* ¦tion of twelve feet! < The Court has viewed the theatre, and must be sa tisfied that Booth, in leaping from the President's box, broke his limb. TbeCourt cannot fail toconclude tbat this statement Of Arnold was but another silly device-, like that of- f'the oil business" which, for the time being, he employed to hide ftom the knowledge of hiscaplor the fact 'that the purpose was to murder the President. No man ean, for a moment, believe that anyeneof these conspirators hoped or desired, by such, a proceeding as that stated by this. prisoner, in take the' President alive; in the -presence of thousands assembled in the theatre, .after .'he had been thus thrown upon the floor ofthe stage, much less to carry him through the 'city, through the¦•',-• Tho further testimony, touching O'Laughlin, that of Street, establishes thfijUi^t.tbrttftOOlittriie 1st of Apr4 he saw him In confidential conversation wUhiJ.Wiuse? Booth, tax this city, on the Avenue. Another, man, whom the witness does not know, was in. douiyersar lion, i r'L.iu-ihl.n called Street to one side, and told hlrut BooLh was bu tly eimaged witu his friend, was t.dteing privately to his friend. This remark or! O'Laugiir Im's is attempted to be accounted for, but the attempt Jailed; his counsel taking the pains to ask what inr dujed O'Laughlin to make the remark, received the lit replv— '-'I did not see the iu ter ior of Mr. O'Laugh lin s mind; I cannot tell." It is the province of this Court to iufer why that remark was made, and what it signified. That John H. tfurratt, George A. Atzeroth, Maiy B, TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 1M S»rr»", David E. Harold, and Lewis Payne, entered into this conspiracy with Booth, is so very clear upon this testimony, that mtlo time ne*d he occupied in bringing again before the Court the evidence which establishes it. By the testimony of Weichman wefln'd Atzeroth in February at the bouse of the prisoner, Mrs. Surratt. He inquired for ber or ior John when he came, aud remained over night. Alter this, and be fore tbe a.-ssassination, he visited there frequently, and at that house bore tbe name of "Port Tobacco." the name by which he was known in Canada among the conspirators there. The same witness testifies tnat be met him on the street, when he said be was going to visit Payne at tbe Herndon House, and also accom panied him, along with Harold and John H. Surratt to the theatre in March, to see Booth play iu the Apostate. At the Pennsylvania House, one or two weeks pre vious to the assassination, Atzeroth made tho state ment to Lieutenant Keim, when asking tor bis knife which he had left in his room, a knife corresponding in size with the one exhibited in Court. "I waut that; if one fails I want the other," wearing at the same time his revolver at his belt. He also stated to Greenawalt, of the Pennsylvania House, in March, that he was nearly broke, but had friends enough to give him as much money as would see him through, adding, "I am going away some of these days, but will return witb as much gold as will keep me all my liie- time." Mr. Greenawalt also says that Booth had fre quent interviews with Atzeroth, sometimes in tne room, and at other times Booth would walk in and immediately go out, Atzeroth following, John M.Floyd testifies that some six weeks before the assassination, Harold, Atzeroth and John H. Sur ratt came to his house at Surrattsville. bringing with them two Spencer carbines, with ammunition, also a rope and wrench. Surratt asked tbe witness to. take care of them and to conceal thecarbines. Surratt took him into a room in the house, it being his mother's house, and showed tbe witness where to put the car bines, between the joists on the second floor. The car bines were put there according to bis directions aud concealed. Marcus P. Norton saw Atzeroth in conver sation with Bootbat tbe National, Hotel about the 2d or 3d of March; the conversation wasconfidential, and tbe witness accidentally heard them talking in regard to President Johnson, and say that "the class -of wit nesses would be ot that character that there could be little proven by them." This conversation may throw some light on the fact tbat Atzeroth was found in pos session of Booth's bank book! Colonel Nevens testifies tbat on the 12th of April last hesaw Atzeroth at theKirkwood House; that Atzeroth there asked him, a stranger, if he knew where Vice President Johnson was, and wiiere Johnson's room was. Colonel W evens showed him where the room of the "Vice President was. and told him that the Vice President was then at dinner. Atzeroth then looked into the dining-room, where Vice President Johnson was dining alone. Kobert R.Jones, the clerk at the Kirkwooa House,state>that on theHth.theday of tlie murder, two days after this, Atzeroth registered his name at the hotel. G. A. Atzeroth, and took No. 126, re taining the room that day, and carrying away the key In this room, alter the assassination, were found the knile and revolver, with which he intended to murder the Vice President. The testimony of all these witnesses leavesno doubt that the prisoner, George A. Atzeroth. entered into this conspiracy with Booth; that he expected to re ceive a large compensation for the services tbat be would render in its execution; that he bad undertaken the assassination of the Vice President for a price; that he, with Surratt andHarold, rendered the impor tant service of depositing the arms and ammunition to be used by Booth and his coniederates as a protec tion to tbeir flight after the conspiracy had been exe cuted, and tbat be was careful, to have his intended victim pointed out to him, and the room he occupied in the hotel, so tbat, when he came to perform his horrid work, he would know precisely where to go and whom to strike. I take no further notice now of the preparatiou which this prisoner made for the successful execution of this part or the traitorous a d murderous design. Tbe question is. did he enter into this conspiracy? His language, overheard by Mr. Norton, excludes eveity other conclusion. Vice President Johnson's name was mentioned in that secret conversation with Booth, and the very suggestive expression was made between them tuat "little could be proved by the witnesses." His comession in bis defense* is conclusive of his guilt. That Payne was in this conspiracy Is confessed iu the deiense made by his counsel, and is also evi dent from ihe facts proved, that when the conspi racy was being organized in Canada, by Thomp son, Sanders. Tucker, Cleary, and Clay, ibis man Payne stood at the door of Thompson: was recom mended and endorsed by Clay with the words. '¦We trust him;" tbat alter, coming hither he first reported himself at the house of Mrs. Mary E. Surratt, inquired ior her and lor John H. Surratt. remained there for tour days, having conversation With both of them; having provided himselfwlth meatus of disguise, was alsosupplied with pistols and a knile, such as he afterwards used, and spurs, preparatory to bis flight; was seen with John H. Surratt, practicing with knives such as those employed in this deed of assassination, and now. beiore the Court; was afterwards provided with K-dging at tbe Herndon House, at the instance of Surratt; was visited thereby Atzeroth, attended Booth and Surratt to Ford's Theatre, occupying witb those partiesthe box, asl believe'and which we may readily infer, in which the President was afterwards murdered. If lurther testimony be wanting that he had entered Into the conspiracy, it may be found in the fact sworn to by Weichman, whose testimony no candid man will discredit, that about the 20tb of March Mrs, Surratt. in great excitement, and weeping, said that herson John had gone away not to return, when about tbree hours subsequently, in the afternoon of thesame day, John H. Surratt reappeared, came rushing: in a state of frenzy into tbe room, in his mother's house, armed, de claring he would shoot whoever came into the room, and proclaiming that his prospects were blasted and his hopes gone; that soou Payne came into the same room, also armed and under great excitement, and was immediately followed by Booth, with his riding whip in his hand, who walked rapidly across the floor from side to side, so much excited that forborne time he did not notice the presence of the witness. Observ ing Weichman, tbe parties then withdrew, upon asug- gestion from Booth, to an upper room, and there had a private interview. From all that transpired on tbat occasion itis apparent that when these parties lelt the house that day it was with ihe full purpose of com- ple, ing some act essential to the final execution of the work of assassination, in conformity with their pre vious confederation and* agreement. They returned foiled, from wbat cause is unknown, dejected, angry and covered with contusion. It is almost imposing upon the patience of the Court to consume time in demonstrating the lact, which none conversant with tbe testimony of this case ca:i for a moment doubt, that John II. Surratt and Mary E. Surratt were as surely in the conspiracy to murder the President as John Wilkes Booth himself. You' have the frequent interviews between John H. Sur ratt and Booth; his intimate relations with Payne; his Visits from Atzeroth and Harold; his deposit or'the arms to cover their flight after the conspiracy should have been executed; hia own declared visit to Bich mond to do what Booth himself sa:d to Chester must * be done to wit:— That he or, some 01 the party must go to Bichmdud in order lo get funds to carry out the conspiracy; that he brought back with him gold, the price of blood, confessing himself that he was there; tbat be immediately weut to Canada, delivered des patches in cipher to Jacob Thompson from Jefferson Davis, which were interpreted ana read by Thompson' in the presence ofthe witness Conover, and in which the conspiracy was approved, and in the language Of Thompson me proposed assassination was ''made all right." One other fact, it any other fact be needed, andl have done with the evidence which proves that John H. Surratt entered into this combination; that is, that it appears by the testimony of the witness, the cashier of the OntaiioBank, Montreal, that Jacob Thompson, about the day that these despatches were delivered, and while Surratt was then present in Canada, drew from that Bank of the Bebel funds there on deposit, the sum of one hundred and eighty thousand dollars. Ibis being done, buri-att finding it safer, doubtless, to go to Canada ior the great bulk of funds, which were tobe distributed amongst these hired assassins than to attempt to carry it through our lines direct rrom. Bichmond, immediately returned to Washington, ahd was present in this city, as is proven by the testimony of Mr. Beid, on tlie afternoon of the nth of April, tbe day of the assassination, booted aud spurred, ready ior the flight whenever the fatal blow should bave been struck. It he was not a conspirator and a party to this great crime, how comes it that from that hour to this no man has seen him in tbe Capital, nor has be been reported anywhere ouiside of Canada, having arrived at Mon treal, as the testimony shows, on tne ISth of April, four days after the murder. Nothing but his conscious cowardly guilt could possibly induce him to absent himself from his mo" her, as he does, upon her trial. Being one of these consnirators, as charged, every act of his in th# prosecjtion of this crime is evidence against Lhe other parties to the conspiracy. That Mary E. Surratt is as guilty as her son of hav ing thus conspired, combined and conl'edeiated to do this murdct, in aid of this Bebellion. is clear. . First, her house wus the head-quarters of Booth, John H. Surratt, Atzeroth, Payne and Harold. She is inquired lor by Atzeroth; sue id inquired for by Payne, and she is visited by Booth, aud holas private conversations with him. His picture, together with that oi the chief conspirator, Jeherson Davis, is found in her house. She sends to Booth lor a carriage to take ber, oil theiith pf Apnl, to Surrattsville, lor the purpose of perfecting the arrangement deemed necessary to the successful exe cution of tlje conspiracy, and especially to facilitate and protect tbe conspirators' in their escape from jus- 198 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. tice, On that occasion Booth, having disposed of his carriage, gives to the agent she employed ten dollars with which to hirea conveyance for that purpose. And yet tbe^pretence is made that Mrs. Surratt went on the Uth to Surrattsville exclusively upon her own private and lawful business. Can any one tell, if that be so, how it gomes tbat she should apply to Boeth tor a conveyance, and bow it comes that he, of bis own accord, having no conveyance to furnish her, should send her ten dollars with which to procure it? There tenet the slighest indication that Booth was under any obligation to her, or that she had any claim upon him, either for a conveyance or for the means with which to procure one. except that he was bound to contribute, being the agent of the conspirators in Canada and Bichmoud, whenever money nngbt be necessary to thecoosummationnf this infernal plot., Onthatday. the 11th of April, John H. Surratt had not returned from Canada with the funds furnished by Thompson. Upon that journey of the llth, the accused, Mary E, Surratt, met the witness, John M. Floyd, at Union; town, fahe calied'bim, he got out of his carriage and came to her, and she whispered to him in so low a- tonethather attendant could not hear her words, though, Floyd, to whom they were spoken, did dis tinctly, hear them, and testifies that she told him he Should ha»ve those "shooting irons" ready, meaning the carbines which her son and Harold and Atzeroth had deposited with him,, and added the reason, "for they would soon be called ior." On the day of the as sassination she again sent for Boqth. had an interview with hi ra in her own house, anil immediately went _again to Surrattsville, and then, at about 0 o'clock in the afternoon, she delivered Lo Floyd a field-glass, and iold him to "have two butties of whisky and the car bines ready, as they would be called for that night." Having thus perfected the arrangement, she re turned i o Washington to her own house, at about half- jmst eight o'clock in the evening to await the final re sult. How could this woman anticipate on Friday af ternoon, atsix o'clock, that th^se arms would he called ior and would be needed that night, unless she was in the conspiracy andknew that the'bloWwas to bestruck, and the night of the assassins attempted, and by that route? Was not the private conversation which Booth held with her inher parlor on the a, teruooh ofthe Mth of April,^ustbe;oresheleftoh this business, inrelation to the orders she should give to have the arms ready? An endeavor is made to impeach Floyd. But the Court will observe that no witness has been called who contradicis Floyd's statement in any material manner, neither has his general character for truth been as sailed. Hew tnen is he impeached? Is it claimed that his testimony shows tbat hb was a party to the con spiracy? Tilen it is conceded by those who set up any ,such pretense that there was a conspiracy. A conspi racy between whom? There can be no conspiracy' without the co-operation or agreement of two or more 'persons. Who were the other parties to it? Was it ,Mary E. Surratt? Was it John II. Surratt, George A. Atzeroth. David E. Harold? These are the only per sons, so far as his own testimony or the testimony of any other witness discloses, with whom he had- a'nv communication whatever on any subject immediately or remotely touching this conspiracy before the assas sination. His receipt aud concealment ot the arms ' are, unexplained, evidence that he was in the coiispi- 'racy. The explanation is that he was dependent upon 'Mary E. Lunau; was her tenant; and bis declaration given in evidence by the accused himself, is that "sbe had ruined him, and brought this trouble upon him." But because he was weak enough, or, wicked enough, to become the guilty depository of tbese arms, and to deliver taem on theorder of Mary E. Surratt to the assassins, it does not follow that he is not to be believed On oath, it is said tbat he concealed the facts that the arms had been leit and called for. . He so tes- tihes himself, but hie gives the reason that he did it l only from apprehension of .danger to his life. If he were in the conspiracy, his general credit being unchallenged, his testimony being uncontradicted in any materiaVmatter, he is to be believed, and' cifltnot bedisbelieved.it his testimony is substantially corro borated by other reliabJe witnesses. Is Tie not corro borated touching the debosit ot arms by the fact that the arms are produced in Court? one of which was found upon the person of Booth at the time he was overtaken ana sfa.n, and which is identified as tbe same which had been leit with Fload by Harold, Surratt ahd Atzeroth ? Is he not enrro oraied In the iactoi the hrst interview with Mrs. Surratt by the joint testimony of Mrs. Offut and Lewis J. Welch- man, each oi whom testified, and they areftontradicted ¦ by ho one, tnat on Tuesday, the 1Kb day of April, at Unioutuwn, Mrs. Surratt called Mr. Fioyd to come to ber, Which he did, and she held a secret conversation with him ? 13 he not corroborated as to the last con versation on the 14th of April by the testimony of Mrs. Oftut, who bwears that upon tbe evening of the Mth of April she saw the prisoner, Mary E. Surratt, at Floyd's bouse, approach and hold conversation with him? Is be not corroborated in the fact to Which ho swears, that Mrs. Surratt delivered to him at that time the field-glass wrapped In paper, by thetevfrorh statement of Weichman, tnat Mrs. Surratt took with ber on that occasion two packages, both of which were wrapped in paper, and one of, which he describes as-a small package, about si|X jtnehes in diameter? The attempt was made by calling Mrs.. Offnt to prove that no such package was delivered but it failed; she merely states that Mrs. Surratt delivered a package wrapped in paper to her alter her arrival there, and before Floyd came in, which was laid down in the room. But whether it wag tlie package about which Floyd tes.ifies, or the other package or thetwo about which Weichman testifies, ashavingbeen carried there thatday by Mrs, Surratt, does not appear. Neither does this witness pretend to.say that Mrs. (Surratt, after she had delivered it to«her, and' the witness bad laid it down in the room, did not again take it up, ir it were thesame, and put it in the hands of FiQ.vd, She only knows that she did not see that done; but she did see Floy i with a package like the pne she received in the room before Mrs. Surratt left. How it came into bis possession she is notable to state; nor what the pack age was that Mrs. Surratt first handed her; nor which of the packages it wasshe afterwards saw in the hands ofFloyd, > ,But there is oneother fact in this case that puts for ever at rest the question of the guilty participation of the prisone*r, Mrs. Surratt, in this conspiracy and mur der; and that is that Payne, who haduodged four days in her house;who during allthat time had sat at her ta ble, and who had often conversed with her; wjben the guilt of bis great crime vwas upon him. and he knew not where else he could so salely goto find a co-con spirator, andbeopuld ,trust none that was not like himself, guilty, with even the knowledge of his pre sence; under cover of darkness, after wandering for three days and nights, skulking beiore the pursuing .officers of justice,, at the hour of midnight, found hia way to the door of Mrs. Surratt, rang.the bell, was ad mitted, and upon being asked, "whom do you want to see?" replied, "Mrs. Surratt." He was then asked by the officer, Morgan, what he came at that time of night for? to which be replied, ''to dig a gutter in the morn ing; Mrs. Surrait, had sent for him." Afterwards he said "Mrs, Surratt knew he was a poor man, and came to him." f Being asked where he last worked, be replied, "sometimes on I street;" and, wbere he boarded, ne re plied, "he had uo boarding-house, and was a poor man who got his living with the pick." which he Gore upon his shoulder, having.stotenit.from theintrenchments of the capital. Upon beiug pressed again why he came there at that lime of night to go to work, he an swered that he simply called to see what time he should go to work in the morning. Upon being, told by the officer who fortunately had preceded him to this bouse that he would have to go to the Provost Marshal's office, he moved and did not answer, where upon Mrs. Surratt was asked to step into the hall and state whether she knew this man. Raising ber, right hand sbe exclaimed, -Before God, sir, I have not seen 'that mun before; I have not hired him; I do hot know anything about bim." The ball was brilliantly lighted.' If not one word bad been said, the mere act ol Payne in flying to her house fbr shelter would have borne witness against her strong as proofs lrom Holy Writ. But when she denies, alter hearing his declarations 'that she had sent for him, or that she had gone to him and hired him, and calls ber God to witness that she iiad never seen him, and knew nothing of him, when, in*pointof fact, she had seen him tor four successive days in her own house, in the same clothing which he then wore, who can resist for a moment the conclusion that these parties \vere alike guilty? The testimony of Spangler's complicity Is conclusive and brief. It was impossible to nope for escape after assassinating the President, and such others as might attend him in Ford's Theatre, without arrangements being first made, to aid the flight ofthe assassin, and to some extent prevent immediate pursuit. A stable was to be provided close to Ford's Theatre, in which the horses coUld be concealed and kept ready for the assassin's use whenever the murderous blow was struck. Accordingly, Bobth secretly, through Maddox, hired a stable in rear of the, theatre and con necting with it by an alley, as early as the 1st of Janu ary last; showing that at that time he had concluded, notwithstanding all tbat has been said to the contrary, to murdfer the President in Ford's Theatre and pro vide tne means for immediate and successful flight. Conscious of his guilt he paid the rent Jor this stable through Maddox, month by mouth, giving him the money. He employed Spangler, doubtless for the rea son that he could trust him with the secret, as a car penter to fit up this shed, so that it would furnish room for two horses and provided the door with lock and key. Spangler did this work for him. Then It was necessary that a carpenter, having access to the thear tre, should be employed by the assassin to provide a bar for the outer door of the passage leading to the President's box, so that When be entered upon his work of assassination, he would be secure from inter ruption from tbe rear. By the evidence, Itis shown that Spangler was In the box in which the President was murdered on the after noon ofthe 14th of April, and when there damned the President and General Grant, and said the President ought to be cursed, he had got so many good men TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 199 killed; showing not only his hostility to tbe President* but the cause of it, that he had been faithful to his oath and had resisted that great Bebellion in the interest of which his lite was about to be sacrificed by this man and his co- conspirators. In performing tbe work whicb had doubtless been intrusted to him by Booth, a mortice was cut iu the wall. A wooden bar was pre pared, one end of whten could be readily inserted in the mortice and the other pressed against the edge of the door on the inside so as to prevent its being opened. Spangler had the skill and opportunity to do that work and all the additional work that was to be done. It is in evidence that tha screws in "the keepers" to the locks on each of the inner doors of the box occu pied by thePresident were drawn. The attempt has been made, ou behalf of tbe prisoner, to show that this was done sometipae before, accidentally, and with no bad design, and had notbeen repaired by reason of in advertence; but that attempt has utterly failed, be cause tbe testimony adduced for that purpose relates exclusively to but one of tbe two inner doors, while the fact is, that thd screws were drawn in both, and the additional precaution taken to cut asmall bole through one oi these doors through which the party approach ing and while in the private passage would be enabled to look into the box and examine tbe exact posture of the President beiore entering. It was also deemed es sential, in tbe execution of this plot, that some one should watch at the outer door, in the rear of the the atre, by whicb alone the assassin could hope for es cape. It was for this work Booth Bought to employ Chester in January, offering $3000 down of the money of his employers, and the assurance that he should never want. - What JCbester refused to do Spangler undertook and promised to do. When Booth brought his horse to the rear door of tbe theatre, on the evening of the murder, he called for Spangler, who went to bim, when Booth was heard to say, to him. "Ned, you'll help me ail you can, won't you." To which Spangler replied, "Ob, yes." When Booth made his escape, it is testified by Col. Stewart, who pursued him across the stage and out through the same door, thatas be approached it some one slammed It shut. Bitterspaugh, who was stand ing behnid the scenes when Booth flred the pistol and fled, saw Booth run down the passage toward the back door, and pursued him: but Booth drew his knile upou him and passed out, slamming the door after him. Bitterspaugh opened it and went through, leaving it open behind him, leaving Spangler inside, and in a position from which he readily could have reached the door. Bitterspaugh also states tnat very quickly alter he had passed through this door he was followed by a large man, the first who followed bim^ and who was, doubtless, Colonel Stewart. Stew art is very positive that he saw this door slammed: that he himself was constrained to open it, and had some difficulty in opening it. He also testifies that as be approached the door. a man stood near enough to have thrown it to with his hand, and this man, the witness believes, was tbe pri soner Spangler. Bitterspaugh has sworu that he left the door open behind him when he went out, and that be was followed by the large man. Colonel Stewart. Who slammed tbat door behind Bitterspaugh ? It was not Bitterspaugh ; itcofild 'not have been Booth, for Bitterspaugh swears that Booth was mounting his horse at the time, and Stewart swears that Booth was upon his horse when he came out. That it was Span gler whoslammed the door alter Bitterspaugh may not only be inferred from Stewart's testimony, but It is made very clear by his own conduct afterward upon the return of Bitterspaugh to tbe stage. The door beingthen open and Bitterspaugh being asked which way Booth, went, had answered. Bitterspaugh says: ** Then I came back on the stage, where I had left Ed ward Spangler : be bit me on tbe face with his band, and said. 'Don't say which way he went/ I asked him what he meant by slapping me in the mouth? He said, ' For God's sake, shut up.' " , The testimony of Withers is adroitly handled to throw doubt upon these facts. It cannot avail, for Withers says he was knocked in tbe scene by Booth, and when he "'come to" ho got a sride view of him. A man' knocked down and senseless, on "coming to" might mistake anybody by a side view, for Booth. An attempt has been made by the defense to dis credit this testimony of Bitterspaugh, by showing his contradictorystatements to Giftord, Carlan antl Lamb, neither of whom do in fact contradict him, but sub stantially sustain him. None but a guilty man would bave met the witness witb a blow for stating which way the assassin had gone. A like confession of guilt was made by Spangler when the witness, Miles, the same evening, and directly after the assassination, came to the back door, where Spangler was standing with others, and asked Spangler who It was that held the horse, to which Spangler replied:— "Hush; don't say anything about it. He confessed his guilt again when be denied to Mary Anderson the fact, proved here beyond all question, that Booth had called him when be came to that door with bis horse, using the emphatic words, "No, he did not; he did not call me." The rope comes to bear witness against him, as did the rone wbicb Atzeroth and Harold and John H. Sur ratt had carried to Surrattsville and deposited there witb the carbines. It is o«ly surprising that the ingenious counsel did not attempt to explain tho depositor' the rope at Sur rattsville by tbe same method that be adopted in ex- filanationot" the. deposit of this rope, some sixty feet ong, found in the carpet-sack of Spangler, unac counted for save by some evidence whi.cn tends to show that he may have carried it away from the theatre. It is not/needful to take time in the recapitulation of the evidence, which shows conclusively that David E Harold was one of these conspirators. His continued association with Booth, witb Atzeroth, his visits to Mrs. Surratt's, his attendance at the theatre witb ' Payne, surratt and Atzeroth, his connection witb At zeroth on the evening of the murder, riding with him on the street in the direction of and near to the theatre at the hour appointed tor the work of assassination, and his linal flight and arrest, show that he, in com mon with all the other parties on trial, and all tbe parties named upon your record not upon trial, had combined and conederated to kill and murder in tile interests of the Bebellion, as charged and specified against them. Tbat this conspiracy was entered into by all these parties, both present and absent, is thus proved by the acts, meetings, declarations and correspondence of all the parties* beyond any doubt whatever. True it is circumstantial evidence, but the Court will remember the rule beiore recited that circumstances cannot lie; that they are beld sufficient in every court where jus tice is judiciously administered to establish the fact of a conspiracy.I shall take no further notice of tbe remark made by the learned counsel who opened lor the defense, and which has been followed by several of hia associates, that, under the Constitution, it requires two witnesses to prove tbe overt act of high treason, than to say, this is not a charge of high treason, but of a treasonable con? spiracy, in aid of a rebellion-, witb intent to kill and murder the Executive officer of the United States, and commander of its armies, and of the murder of the President in pursuance of that conspiracy, and witb the intent laid. been there last fall, he answered that be did not know whether it was that man or one of his brothers, but he understood he had some brothers, and added, that If it was tbe Booth w.ho was there last fall, he knew that one, but concealed the fact that this man had beeAat his house on that day and was then at his house, and hart attempted, in his presence, to disguise bis person? He was sorry, very sorry, that the thing bad oc curred, but not so sorry as to be willing to give any evidence to these two neighbors, who were manifestly honest and upright men, that the murderer had been harbored in his house all day, and was probably at that moment, as his own subsequent confession shows, lying concealed in his house or near by, subject to his call. This is the man who undertakes to show by his own declaration, offered In evidence against my pro test, of what he said afterward, on Sunday afternoon, the 16th, to his kinsman, Dr. George D. Mudd, to whom be then stated tbat tbe assassination of tbe President was a most damnable act, a conclusion In which most men will agree with him, and to establish which his testimony .was not needed. But it is to be remarked that this accused did not intimate that the man whom he knew the evening before was the ninrd?rer had found reluge In bis house, had disguised his person, and sought concealment in the swamp upon the crutches which he had provided fbr him. Why did he conceal thisafact from his kinsman? After the church services were over, however, in another conversation on their way home, he did tell Dr. George .Mudd that two suspicious persons had been at his house, who had come there a little before day break on Saturday morning; that one of them had a broken leg, which he bandaged; that they got some thing to eat at his house; that they seemed to be labor ing under more excitement than probably would re sult from the injury; that tbey said they came from. Bryantown, and inquired the way to Parson Wilmer's; that while at his house one of them called for a razor and shaved himself. The witness says: "I do not re member whether he said that this party shaved off his whiskers or moustache, but he altered somewhat or probably materially his features." Finally, the pri soner, Dr. Mudd, told this witness that he, in company with the younger of the two men, went down the road toward Bryantown in search of a vehicle to take the wounded man away from his house. How comes it that be concealed in his conversation the lact proved that he went with Harold toward Bry antown, and left Harold outside of the town? How comes it tbat in this second conversation, on Sunday, insisted upon here with such pertinacity as evidence for tbe defense, but whicb had never been called for by the prosecution, he concealed from his kinsman the fact which he had disclosed tbe day before to Hardy and Farrell, that it was Booth who assassinated the President, and tbe fact which is now disclosed by his other confessions given in evidence for the prosecu tion, tbat it was Booth whom* he had sheltered, con cealed in his house, and aided to his biding place in the swamp ? He volunteers as evidence his further statement, however, to this witness, that on Sunday evening he requested the witness to state to the mili tary authorities ihat two suspicious persons had boen at his house, anasee if anything could be made of It. He did not tell the witness what became of Harold and where he parted with him on the way to Bryantown. How comes it that when he was in Bryantown on tbe Saturday evening before, when he knew that Booth was then at his bouse, and that Booth was the mar- tderer of the President, he did not himself state it to the ^military authorities then in that village, as he well knew ? His difficult to see what kindled his suspicions on Sunday, if none were in bis mind on Saturday .when he was in possession of tbe fact that Booth bad mur dered the President, and was then secreting and dis guising himself in the prisoner's own house. His conversation with Gardner on the same Sun day at the church is also introduced here, to relieve him from tbe overwhelming evidences of his guilt. He communicates nothing to .Gardner of the fact that Booth had been in his house; nothing of the fact that he knew the day before that Booth had murdered the President; nothing of the fact that Booth had disguised or attempted to disguise him self; nothing of the fact tbat be had gone with Booth's associate. Harold, in search of a vehicle, the more speedily to expedite their flight; nothing or the fam that Booth had found concealment in the woods and swamp near his house, upon the crutches which be bad furnished him. He contents himself with merely stating "that we ought to raise immediately a home guard to hunt up all Buspiclous persons pass ing through our section of country, and arrest them, for there were two suspicious persons at my house yesterday morning." It wouid have looked more like aiding Justice and arresting felons if he had put in execution his project ofa home guard on Saturday, and made it effective by the arrest of the man then in his bouse who had lodged with him last fall; witb whom he had gone to purchase one of the very horses employed in his flight after the assassination; whom be had visited last winter ia 202 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Washington, and to whom he had pointed out the very route by which he had escaped by way of his boufie; whom- he had again visited on the 86. of last March, preparatory tothe commission of this greatcrlme: and *#ho he knew, when hesheltered and concealed him in tbe wood* on Saturday, was not merely a suspicious person, but was, in iact, the murderer and assassin of Abraham 'Lincoln. While I deem it my duty to say here, as I said before, When these declarations, uttered by the accused on Sunday, the iGth, to Gardner and George D. Mudd, were attempted to be offered on the part Of tho accuSed,'thttt they are in no sense evidence, and by the law where wholly inadmissible, yet I state it as my conviction, that, being ur oh, the record upon motion of the accused himself, no far as these declara tions to Gardner and George D. Mnddgo, they are ad ditional indications bf the guilt of theaccused, in this, that they aromauilestly suppressions of truth and sug gestions of falsehood and deception; they are but the utterances and confessions of guilt. To Lieutenant Lovett, Joshua Lloyd and Simon Gavicau, Who, in the pursuit of the murderer, visited his house on the lSth of April, the Tuesday after the murder, he denied positively, upon inquiry, tbat two men had passed his house, or had come to, his house on the morning alter i he assassination. Two of these witnesses swear positively to his having made the de nial, and the other says he hesitated to answer the duestion he put to him;, all of them agree that he af terwards admitted that two men had been there, one of whom bad a broken liinb. which he had set: and wfaen asked by this witness who that man was, he said he did not know; that the man was a stranger to him, and tbat the two bad been thei'e but a short time. Lloyd a^ked him if he had ever seen any of tho par ties, Booth, Harold and Su*.ratt; ho said he had never Seen them while it is positively proved that hewas acquainted with John H. Surratt, who bad been in his house; that he knew Booth, and had introduced Booth to Surratt last winter. Afterwards, oh Friday, the £lst, he admitted to Lloyd that he had been introduced to Sooth )ast fall, nnd chat this man who came to his house on Saturday, the loth, remained there from, a;bnnt four o'clock in the morning until ' about four in the afternoon; that one of them lelt bis house on horseback and the other walking. In the lirst conver sation he denied ever haviim seen these men. Colonel Wells also testifies that, in his conversation with Dr. M-ndd on Friday, the liist, the prisoner said that he had gone to Bryaniown. or near Bryantown, to soe some friends on Saturday, and that as ho came back to his own bou^e he saw tho person he afterwards supposed to be Harold passing to the left of his house towards tbe barn, but that he did not seethe other person at all after helethim m his own house, about one o'clock. If this statement be true, how did Br. Bludd see the same person leave his bouse on crutqhes? He further stated to this witness that he returned to Jiis own house about 4 o'clock in the afternoon; that he did not know this wounded man: said ho could not re cognize him from the photograph which i;j of record here, but admitted that he had mct'Booth some time fn November, when he had some conversation with him about lands and Iiotscs; that Booth had remained with him1 that night in November, and on the next ¦day had purchased a horse. He said lie had not again teen Booth from the time ot theinbuoduction in No vember up t6 his arrival at his house on the Saturday morning after the assassination. Is not this a confes sion that he did see John WilkesBooth on that morn ing at his house, and knew it was Booth? if he did not know bim, how came he to make this statement to the witness that "he had not seen Booth after Kovember prior to his arrival there ou the Saturday < morning?" He had said before to thesame witness he did not know the wounded man. He said further to Colonel Wells, tbat when be went up stairs alter their arrival, he noticed that the person he suftposed to be Booth, had shaved off, his moustache, it is not inferable fromtbistleciaration that he tlien supposed him tobe Booth? Yet he declared the same afternoon, and •while Booth was in his own house, that Booth was the murderer ofthe President. One of the most remark able statements madbto this' witness by the, prisoner was that he hoard ior the first time on Sunday i orn- iug, or late in tho evening of Saturday, that tho Presi dent had been murdered. Frobi whom did ho hear it? The witness (Colonel "NyeHs) volunteered his " Impres sion" that Dr. Mudd had said he had heard it after the personliad left-hls house. If tho " impression" of the witness thus volunteered Is to be taken as'.evidence, and tbe counsel ibr the accused, Judging from their manner,seem tothlnkltougbttobe, let this question be answered, how could Dr. Mudd have made that impression upon any body truthfully, when It Is proved by Farrell and Hardy that on his returu l^rom Brvan- toWri, on Saturday afternoon, he hoi only stated that the President, Mr. Seward and his son bad been assas sinated, but that Boyle had assassinated Mr. Seward. .and Booth had assassinated the President? Add to ibis the fact that be said to this witness tbat he left Ills own hipuse at one o'clock, and when be returned tbe men were gone; yet it Is in evidence, *by his own declarations, that Booth left his house at four o'clock on crutches, and he must bave been there to have seen it, or he' could not have known the fact. Mr. Williams testified that he was at Mudd's house on Tuesday, the 18th of April, when he said that strangers bad not been that >way. and also declared that he beard, for the first time, of the assassination ofthe President on Sunday morning, at church; after wards, Oh Friday, the 2ist. Mr. Williams asked him concerning the men who had been at his house, one of whom had a broken limb, and he confessed tbey had been there. Upon being asked if they were Booth and Harold, he said they were not; t/Ktt %e knew Booth. I think it is fair to conclude that be did know Booth, when we consider the testimony of Weichman, oi" Norton, of Evans, and all the testimony just re ferred to, wherein he declares, himself, that he nofr 6niy knew him. but that he had lodged with hi-nst, and that he had himself gone with him when he pur chased hia horse from Gardner last fall, forthe very . purpose of aiding the flight of himself, or some of his confederates. All these circumstances taken together, which, as we have seen upon high authority, are stronger as evi dences of guilt than even direct testimony, leave no further room libr argument, and no {rational aoijbt that Doctor Samuel A. Mudd was as certainly in -this con spiracy as were Booth &Bd Harold, whom he sheltered and entertained; receiving them under cover of dark ness on the morning after the assassination, collocat ing them throughout that day from' the hand of off-' tended justice, and aiding them by every endeavor, to puisuetheir way successfully to their co-conspirator* Arnold, at Fortress Monroe, and which direction be fled until overtaken and slain. We next finaHarold and his confederate, Booth, af ter tbeir departure from the house of Mudd, across tbe Potomac, in the neighborhood of Port Conway, on Monday, the 24th of April, conveyedinawagou. There Harold, in order to obtain theaid of Captain Jett, Bug gies and Bainbridge»ot tho Confederate army, said to Jett, " Wo are the assassinators of thePresident;" tbat this was bis brother with him. who, with himself, be longed to A. P. Hill's Corps: that his brother had been wounded at Petersburg; that their names were Boyd. He requested Jett and his Bebel companions to take them outo*f the lines. Alter this. Booth joined these parties, was pluced-on Buggies' horse, and crossed the Bappahannock Biver. They then proceeded to the house of Garrett, in the neighborhood of Port Boyal, and nearly midway be tween Washington City and Fortress Monroe, where they were to have joined Arnold. Before tnese Rebel guides and guards parted with them, Harold con fessed that they were traveling under assumed names?- that his own name was Harold.'aud that the name of' the wounded man was John Wilkes Booth, "who bad killed the President.'' TheBebeis leitJBooth at Gap* reit's, wh( re Harold revisited bim from time to time, until they were captured. At two o'clock on Wednes day morning, the 2Cth, a party of "United States officers and soldiers surrounded Garrett's baru, where Booth and Harold lay concealed, and demanded their sur render. Booth cursed Harold, calling him a coward, aud bade himgo, when Harold c me out and surrotf*- dcred himself, was taken into custody, and is now brought into Court. The barn wa< then set on Are, when Booth sprang to his feet, amid tbe llames tbat ig'abou were kindling?about him, carbine in hand, and ap proached the door, seeking, by the flashing light or the tire, to find some new victim lor his murderona' hand, wheiihe was shot, as he deserved to be, by Se*-: geaut Corbott, in order to save his comrases from.' wounds or death by the hands of this desperate assas sin. Upon his person was found the following bill of exchange;— "jNoj!i492. Thef Ontario Bank, Montreal Branch Exchange for Jtui 12s. lud. Montreal, 27th October, 1864, Sixty days alter sight oi this first of exchange, second and third of the same tenor and date, pay to the order of -J. Wilkes Booth £61 12s. lOd. sterling, value re ceived, aud charge to the account of this office. H. Stanus, manager. To Messrs. Glynn, Mills die Co,, London." Thus fell, by the hands of one of the defenders of tbe Republic, this hired assassin, who, for a price, mur dered Abraham Lincoln, bearing upon his person, as this bill of exchange testifies, additional evidence of the fact that he had undertaken, in aid of rebellion; this worK of assassination by tbe hands of himself and his confederates, lor such sum as the accredited agents of Jefferson Davis might pay him or them, out of the funds of the Confederacy, which, as is in evi dence, they had in "Any amount" In Canada for tire purpose of rewarding conspirators, spies, poisoners and assassins, who might take service under their false commissions, and do tbe work of the incendiary and the-murderer upon the lawful representatives of the A merican people, to whom had been entrusted the care of the Republic, the maintenance ot the Coustitur tion and jfcbo execution ot the laws. The Codrt will remember that it is in the testimony of MerrlLt, and Montgomery, and Conover, thatThomp- son, and Sahders, and Clay, and Cleary, made then? boasts that tbey had money in Canada' for .this very purpose, Nor as it to be overlooked or forgotten that TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 203 the officers of the Ontario Bank at Montreal testify that during tl:e current year of this conspiracy and as sassination Jacob Thompson had on deposit In tbat bank the sum of six hundred aud forty-nine thousand dollars, and that these deposits to the credit of Jacob Thompson, act-rued lrom the negotiation of bills ot ex change drawn bv tne Secretary of the Treasury or' tbe so-called Confederate Mates ort Fraser, Trenholm & Co., of Liverpool, who were known to be the financial agents of the Conft- derate States. With an ui drawn deposit in this bank of lour hundred and flftv-fivft dol lars, which has remain* d to his credit sinceOctober last, and with an unpiid bill of exchange drawn by the same bank upon Loudon, in his possession and fuund upon n:s perscn. B joth ends his guilty career in this work of conspiracy and blood in April, igi'5, as be be gan itin October.-* 1804, in combinafon with Jefferson Davis. Jacoh Thompson, George N. Sanders, "Clement C: Clay. William C. Cleary, Beverly Tucker and other co-cons pvrators, making use of the money of the:Rebel Confederation to aid in the execution and in the flight, bearingatthe moment of his dealb upon his person their money, par; of the price which they paid for his great crime, to aid him in its consummation, and se cure him afterwards from arrest and the just penalty which by the law of God and the law, of man is de nounced against treasonable conspiracy and murder. By all the testimony in the case.it is, In my judg ment, made as clear as any transaction can be shown by human -testimony, tbat John Wilkes Booth and John H. Surratt, and the several accused, David E. Harold, George A. Atzeroth, Lewis Payne, Michael O'Loughlin, Edward Spangler, Samuel Arnold. Mary E. Surratt, and Samuel A. Mudd, did, with intent to aid the existing Bebellion and to subvert the Constitu tion and law&of tbe United States, in the month of October last and tberealter. combine, confederate and conspire with Jefferson Davis. George N, Sanders, Beverly Tuckev, Jacob Thompson, William C. Cleary, Clement C. C^y, George Harper, George Young, and others unknown, to kill and murder, within the mili tary department oF Washington, and within the in trenched fortifications and military .lines thereof. Abraham Lincoln, then President, ofthe United States, and-Commande -in-Chief of tho army and navy there of; A'ndrew Johnson, Vice President of the United States; William H. Seward, Secretary of State:, ana Uivsses"S: Grant, Lieiiteuant-General in command of the armies of the "United Stales; and that, Jefferson Davis, the chielof thisKebillion, was the instigator and procurer,through his accredited agents in Canada, of the treasonable conspiracy.. It is also submitted to tbe Court that it is clearly es tablished by tbe testimony that John Wilkes Booth, in pursuance of this conspiracy, so entered into by him And the accused, did, on tbe night of the 14th or April, 18(15, within the mil. tary department of Washington, and the intrenched fortifications and military lines thereof, aud with the intentiaid. Inffictamortal wound upon Abraham Lincoln/ then President and Com- mauder- in-Chief of the army and navyof theUnited States, whereof he died; that in pursuance of the same conspiracy and within the*said department and in- trenchecfline^. Lewis Payne. assaulted, witbintent to kill atrd murder, William H. Seward, then Secretary of State ol the United States; that George A. Atzeroth, in Sursua nee oi the same conspiracy, and within. the said epartment, laid in wait, with intent to kill and mur der Andrew Johnson, then Vice-President of the •United States: that Michael O'-Laughlin, within said denartment. and in pursuance of sai-lcpnspiracy. laid In wait to kill and murder Ulysses B.Grant, then in command of thp armies of tbe United States: and that MaryE Surratt. David E. Harold, Samuel Arnold, Samuel A. Mudd, and Edward Spanglerdld encourage, aid and abet the commission of said«veral acts in the prosecution ot'said conspiracy-; If this treasonable conspiracy has not been wholly executed; .if the several executive officers ot the United States and the commander of its armies, to kill and murder-whom the said several accused: thus con federated and conspired, have not each, and- all fallen by the hand's ot these conspirators, thereby leaving the people of the United States without a President or feice President; without a -Secretary of State, who alone is clothed with authority by the law to call an election to fill the vacancy, should any arise, in the offices of President aud Vice President, and without a lawful commander of the armies of the Republic, it is only because tbe conspirators were deterred by the vigilance and fidelity of the executive officers,, whose lives were mercifully protected on that night of murder bv the care of the Infinite Being, who has thus tar saved the Republic, and crowned i.ts arms with 'tflhis conspiracv was thus entered into by the ac eused^ if John Wilkes Booth did kill and murder Abraham Lincoln in pursuance thereof: if Lewis P^Tnedid- in pursuance of said conspiracy, assault ^tn intent to kill and murder William %. Seward,, as stated- and if the several parties accused did commit tSfiP-S acts alleged against them in the prosecu- tftfn S /alrl conspiracy; then It Is the law that all the ffii?s to thS??onspiraiy, whether present at the time 5? its execution or not, whether on trial before this Court or not, 'are alike guilty of the several octs done by each in the execution of tbe common design. What these conspirators did in the execution orthls con spiracy by the hand of one of their co-conspirators', they did themselves; his act, done in the prosecution of the common design, ,w-as the act of all the parties to the treasonable combination, because done iu exe cution and furtherance of their guilty and treasonable" agreement. As we have seen, this'is the rule, whether all the conspirators are indicted or not; whether they are all on trial or not." "It is not material what tbe nature of the indictment is. provided the offense involve a con spiracy. Upon indictment for murder, for instance, i€ it appear that others, together with the prisoner, con spired to perpetrate the, crime, the act of one done in pursuance of tbat intention, would be evidence against thereat.': (I Whar.,706.) To the sameeifect are the words of Chief Justice Marshall, before cited, that Whoever leagued in a general conspiracy, performed any part, however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, are guilty as principals. In this treasonable conspiracy, to aid the existing armed Be bellion, by murdering the executive officers ofthe United States and the commander or its armies, all the parties to it must be held as priacipals, and the act of one. in the prosecution of the common design, the act of all. . I leave the decision of this dread issue! with tho Court, to which alone it belongs. It is for you to say, upon your-oaths, whether theaccused are guilty. - I am not conscious that in this argument Ihave made any erroneous statement of the evidence, or drawn any, erroneous conclusions; yet I pray the Court, out of tender regard and jealous care for the rights of. the accused, to see that no error of mine, if any there be, shall work them harm. The past ser-, vices of tbe members of this honorable Court give as surance that, without fear, favor, or affection, they will discbarge with fidelity the duty enioined upon them by their oaths. ^Vhatever else may befall,! trust in-God .that m this, as In every other American Court* the rights of tne. whole people will be respected, and that the Republic in this, its supreme hour of trial, will be true to itself and just to all— ready to protect the rights of the humblest, to redress every wrong, .to avenge every crime, to vindicate, the majesty of law, and to maintain inviolate the Constitution— whether it be secretly or openly assailed bv hosts- armed witb gold or armed- with steel. JOHN A. BINGHAM. Special Judge Advocate. Washington, June 28.— The Military Commission met this day, with closed doors, in secret session, to deliberate on the testimony and finding of a verdict for pr against the conspirators, and after a session of six hours duration, not coming to a decision in all the cases, adjourned till the next day, Thursday, June29tb. _ — -* Washington, June 29.— The Military Commission met this morning in secret session, with closed doors, and after being in session some hours found a verdict in the case^of each of the conspirators, when a record was-madeup and forwarded to the War Department) for review, from whom it will be sent to the President, who will examine the whole of the voluminous testi mony closely before rendering his decision on the findings of the Military Commission. Washington, July 6.— In accordance with. the findings and sentences of the Military Cam- mission, whicti the President, approved yester day, David E. Harold, Lewis Payne, Mrs. Sur ratt and George A. Atzeroth are to be hung to morrow, by the proper military authorities. Dr. Mudd, Arnold and O'Laughlin are to be imprisoned for life, and Spangler for six years, all at hard labor, in the Albany Penitentiary. The Official Order. Washington, July 6.— The following import- antorder has just been issued?— War Department, Adjutant- General' a Office. Washington, July 5. 1865.— To Major- General' W.S. Hancock^ United States Volun teer*, commanding the Middle Military. Divi sion, Washington, D. C. . Whereas, By the Military Commisstfcn ap pointed in paragraph 4, Special Orders No. 211, dated War Department, Adjutant-General's Of fice Washington, May 6, 1865. aud ot which Mar ioivGeneral David Hunter. United,States VqIimi- teers, was President;, the foilowingpersons were tried and, after.- mature consideration pf evi-? dence adduced in their cases, were found a^-nd sentenced as hereinafter stated, as follows:— 204 TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. Harold's Sentence. First. David E. Harold.— Finding ofthe speci fication, guilty, except combining, confederat ing and conspiring with Edward Spangler, as to which part thereof, hot guilty; of the charge guilt}', except the Words of thecharge, that he combined, confederated and conspired wjth Edward Spangler, as to which part of the charge not guilty. Sentence.— And the Commission does, there fore, sentence him, the said David E. Harold, to he hanged by the neck until he be dead, at such time and place as the President of the United States shall direct, two-thirds of the Commission concurring therein. Atzerotn's Sentence. Second. GeorgeA. Atzeroth.-Finding of speci fication, guilty, except combining, confedera ting and conspiring with Edward Spangler; of this, not guilty. Of the charge, gnilty, except combining, confederating and conspiring with Edward Spangler; of this, not guilty. Sentence.— And the Commission does there fore sentence him, the said George A. Atzeroth, to be hung by the neck until he be dead, at suth time and place as the President of the United Statesshall direct, two-thirds of the Commission concurring therein. Payne's Sentence. Third. Lewis Payne.— Finding of the speci fication, guilty, except combining, confederat ing and conspiring with Edward Spangler; of this, not guilty. Ofthe charge, guilty, .except combining, confederating affld conspiring with Edward Spangler; of this, n Jt guilty. Sentence. — And the Commission does therefore sentence him, the said Lewis Payne, to be hung by the neck until he be dead, at such time and place as the President of the United States shall direct, two- thirds of the Commission concurring therein. ""Mrs. Sarratt's Sentence. Fourth. Mary E. Surratt.— Finding of the specification guilty, except as to receiving, sus taining, harboring and concealing Samuel Ar nold ahd Michael O'Laughlin, and except as to combining, confederating and conspiring with Edward Spangler; of this not guilty. Of the charge guilty, except as to combining, confede rating and conspiring with Edward Spangler; Of this not guilty. . Sentence.— And the Commission does, there- ' fore, sentence .ber, the said Mary E.. Surratt, to be hung by the neck until she be dead, at such time and place as the President of the United States shall direct, two-thirds of the members pf the Commission concurring therein. President Johnson's Approval. And Whereas, The President of the United States has approved the foregoing sentences in the following order, to wit: — Executive Mansion, July 5, 1865.— The fore going sentences in the cases of David E. Harold, G. A. Atzeroth, Lewis Payne and Mary E. Sur ratt, are hereby approved; and it is ordered that the sentences an the cases of David E. Harold, G. A. Atzeroth, Lewis Payne and Mary E. Sur ratt be carried into execution by the proper mi litary authority, under the direction of the Se cretary of War, on the 7th day of July, 1865, be tween the hours of 10 o'clock A. M. and 2 o'clock P. M. of that day. (Signed) Andrew Johnson, President. Therefore you are hereby commanded to cause tbe foregoing sentences in the cases of David E. Harold, G. A. Atzeroth, Lewis Payne and Mary E.Surrattto be duly executed, in accordance with the President's order. By command of the President of the United States. E. D. Townsend, Assistant Adjutant-General. In the remaining cases of O'Laughlin, Spangler, Arnold.and Mudd, the findings and sentences are as follows:— O'Langblin's Sentence. Fifth. Michael O'Laughlin.— Finding ofthe specification guilty, except the words thereof, as follows:— And in the words thereof as follows:— And in the further prosecution of the conspiracy afore said, and of its murderous and treasonablepur- poses aforesaid, on the nights of the 13th and 14th of April, 1S65, at Washington City, and within the military department and military lines aforesaid, the said Michael O'Laughlin did there and then lie in wait for Ulysses S.. Grant, then Lieutenant-General and Commander or the armies of the United States, with intent then and there to kill and murder the sai€ Ulysses S. Grant, of said words not guilty, and except combining, cOnfederatingand conspiring with Edward Spangler, of this not guilty. Ol the charge, guilty, except combining, confede rating and conspiring with Edward Spangler; of this not guilty. Sen tence.— The Commission sentence O'Laugh- in to be imprisoned at hard labor for life. Spangler's Sentence. ' Sixth. Finding.— Edward Spangler, of the specification, not guilty, except as to the words "the said Edward Spangler, on said lith day of April, A. D. 1865, at about the same hour ofthat day, as aforesaid, within said military depart ment and the military line* aforesaid, did aid and abet him (meaning John Wilkes Booth) In making his escape after the said Abraham Lin coln had been murdered in manner aforesaid," and of these words, guilty. Of the charge not guilty, but guilty of having feloniously and traitorously aided and abetted John Wilkes Booth in making his escape after having killed and murdered Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, he, the said Edward Spangler, at the timeof aiding ana abet ting as aforesaid, well knowing that the said Abraham Lincoln, President as aforesaid, had been murdered by the said John Wilkes Booth as aforesaid. The Commission sentenced Span gler to hard labor for six years. Arnold's Sentence. Seventh. Samuel Arnold.— Of the specifica tions guilty, except combining, confederating, and conspiring with Edward Spangler, of this not guilty. Of the charge 'guilty, except com- biuiug, confederating- and conspiring with Ed ward Spangler, of this not guilty. The Commis sion sentenced him to imprisonment at hard labor for life. Dr. Mudd's Sentence. Eighth. Samuel A. Mudd.— Of the specification guilty, except combining, confederating and conspiring with Edward Spangler; of this not guilty; and excepting receiving and entertain ing and harboring and concealing said Lewis Payne, John H. Surratt, Michael O'Laughlin. George A. Atzeroth, Mary E. Surratt and Samuel Arnold, of this not guilty. Of the, charge guilty, except combining, con federating and conspiring with Edward Span gler. of this not guilty. The Commission sen tenced Mudd to be imprisoned at hard labor for life. The Presidents order in these cases is as fol lows:— ' It is further ordered that the prisoners, Sa muel Arnold, Samuel A. Mudd, and Michael O'Laughlin, be confined at hard labor in the Penitentiary at Albany, New York, during the period designated in their respective sentences. Andrew Johnson, President* Washington, July 6.— The announcement and findings of the Military Commission in the cases of the conspirators, made to-day about noon, completely absorbed public attention during the remainder of the day. Scarcely anything else was talked of in the.streets. hotels and In every place where citizens mostly con gregate. The general sentiment seemed to justify the findings of the Commission, but the short pe riod of time allowed the prisoners between tbe announcement of the sentence and their exe cution did not generally appear to meet the public approval. This, however, is in accord ance with the practice of courts-martial, sen tences in such cases being executed almost Im mediately after the findings are officially pub lished. TRIAL OF THE ASSASSINS AT WASHINGTON. 205 Judge Holt with the President. ThePresident having nearly recovered from his indisposition, yesterday invited Judge Ad vocate-General Holt to U»e White House, and after mature deliberation, the President ap proved the findings and sentences in each case as rendered by the Commission. ; Tbe Sentences Read to tbe Prisoners. About noon to-day General Hancock, who is charged with the execution of the sentences, proceeded to the Penitentiary, and in company with Major-General Hartranft visited the cell of each prisoner and informed each what ver dict had been rendered. No one was present at this interview but the two Generals and the turnkey. Mrs. Surratt, On learning her fate, was extremely depressed, and wept bitterly. She was alone, her daughter having left ber a short time before, not know ing the sentence was to be announced to her mother to-day. Payne. Seemed to regard it as a foregone conclusion. and manifested little or no emotion. He has evidently nerved himself to meet his death with firm resolution. Atzeroth Was violently agitated and almost paralyzed with fear. Ho evidently hoped for a different result, but it is difficult to see how be could have expected it to have been otherwise. Harold Listened to the reading of the order in his case with boyish indifference, but soon after became impressed withHhe solemnity of his situation and appeared more serious, asking that his sisters might be allowed to visit him. Payne asks for a Baptist Clcrsyman. Payne asked that Dr. Stracker, a Baptist clergyman of Baltimore, be sent for, which was done, and that gentleman arrived here this evening, and is in attendance upon the prisoner. Mrs. Surratt's. Spiritual Advisers. Mrs. Surratt asked that Fathers Walter and Wiget, Catholic priests ofBaltimore.be sent for. Her wish was immediately complied with, and both the clergymen arrived this evening, and were admitted to her cell. Rev. Dr. Butler Attends Atzerotb. Atzeroth could name no clergyman he wished to attend him; but upon General Hartranft naming Rev. Mr. Butler, a Lutheran clergyman of Washington city, the prisoner desired he might be sent for, and he was in attendance upon the prisoner early this afternoon. Harold's Sisters Tisit Elian. Five of Harold's sisters visited bim this after noon at the prison and the scene was truly dis tressing. Afterthey left him they wept bitterly, in the entrance room down stairs. Two are grown ladies and the others young misses. But they all seemed to realize the dreadful situation of their brother. One of them.brought a small basket of cakes and little delicacies for the prisoner, which was left in charge of General Hartranft to be ex amined before being given to him. One of the elder sisters sat down and wrote a note to her brother, which was also left in charge of General Hartranft to give Harold. Tbe Scaffold Is being built this afternoon, in the south yard ofthe prison, and will be large enough to exe cute all at one time. The coffins and burial clothes are being prepared this afternoon and evening at the arsenal.A False Rumor. , An impression appears to prevail throughout thecity tbat Mrs, Surratt will not be executed, that the President will commute her sentence to Imprisonment. . In less than an hour after the findings had been announced this rumor was on the street, and it was asserted that many whp bad been most strenuous in asking for severe punishment upon the conspirators were willing to units in an effort to have the sentence in Mrs, Surratt's case changed to imp jsonment. This rumor was wide spread, but bail no foundation in fact. The wish was evidently father to the thought. No Executive Clemency. Harold's sisterscalled at the White House this afte.noon, pleading for mercy, and Father Walker and Mr. Aiken, one of Mrs. Surratt's counsel^also called on behalf of Mrs. Surratt, but. the President declined to see any of them, and referred them all to Judge Holt. It would seem to be the determination of the President to decline interfering in the matter, and there isno doubt but all those condemned to death will be executed to-morrow, Mrs. Surratt among the number. Aiken says he has some after-discovered tes timony to offer, favorable to her case. But it is not probable the President will relent to-mor row. Payne, Atzeroth, Harold and Mrs. Surratt are hung ! Washington, July 9, 1865.— To-day the last scene of the terrible tragedy of the 14th of April took place. Lewis Payne, David E. Harold, George A. Atzeroth, and Mary E. Surratt, the ringleaders in the murderous plot to assassinate the heads of the Government, and throw the land into anarchy and confusion, paid tha penalty of their crime upon the gallows. The execution was comparatively a private one. The following is the form ot order which was impera tively required to secure admission to the scene of tha execution :— Head-quarters. Middle Military Division, Washington, D. C, July 7, 1865.— Major-General J. F. Hartranft, Military Governor of Military Prisons:— Admit . Reporter of The Philadelphia In-- quikeb, to the Mill i ary .Prison this day. WINFIELD S. HANCOCK, Major-General Volunteers Commanding. \ On the.reverse was written "between 10 and 1 P. M." \ Each pass was registered with the rank and station of t h e officer and the paper to which the representative belonged. Only one hundred were issued, and one-fourth of these were to representatives of the press. , Over a thousand applications were made to General Hancock for passes trom various sources, but he conducted the whole affair with the most commendable propriety, and squelched completely the "Secesh" sympathizers who wished to witness tbe execution. Those who came from mere personal curiosity were all denied.. The Weather. Tne snn shone with its intensest rays, and had It not been for a breeze at intervals the thermometer would have stood at 100. Early in the Mornin-r. At as early an hour as eight A. M. people commenced to wend their way down to tbe prison, and the boats to Alexandria, which ran close by the jail, were crowded all day by those who took the trip in hopes*of catching a glimpse of the gallows, or of the execution, but it was alTin vain. The only position outside of the jail that could be used as an observatory, was the large building upon the left side ofthe Arsenal, which had about fifty spectators upon it, who had a good view of the whole. The Army Officers. Between nine and ten o'clock in tbe morning the three ante-rooms of the prison, on the first floor, were thronged with army officers, principally of Hancock's corps, anxious to get a view of the execution from tha windows, irom which the scaffold could be plainly seen. Tbe Newspaper Reporters Soon began to congregate there also, and In a few minutes not less than a score were in attendance, waking to pick up tbe smallest item of interest. No newspaper man was allowed to seethe prisonersin their cells before they were led out to execution, and General Hartranft was. very decided on this point. Tbe Clergy. While waiting here for over two hours, the clergy men passed in and out through the heavily riveted doors leading to the prisoners' cells, which creaked heavily on its hinges as it swung to and fro, and tha massive key was turned upon the inner side with a heavy sound as a visitor was admitted within its por tals. Mrs. Surratt's Daughter ' Passed into the ante-room, accompanied by a lady, who remained seated, while the (laughter rapidly en* tered the hall, and, passing through the heavy door, ia soon lu tho corridor where her mother is incarcerated, TRIAL OF THE' ASSASSINS AT' WASHINGTON. The Counsel for the Prisoners. Messrs. Cox, Doster, Aiken, and ClampItU, counsel fbrahe prisoners, are specially passed in forashort interview, and in a lew minutes they return again-to the ante-rooms. Time flies»rapuHy, and no' a moment i& to>be lost?. Wo use, ess words are tobe spoken, but earnest, terse sentences are lrom necessity employed when conversing wi .in -the doomed prisoners, whose lives are now measured by minutes. Aiken,and Clamp it are both here. Tbey walk im patiently up and down the room, whispering a word to each other as to the prospects of Mrs. Surratt's be ing reprieved through the operations of the habeas corpus, which, Aii;en confidently tells us, has been granted bv Justice Wylie, and from which he antici pates favorable resflts. Strange infatuation! It was She ras-te straw' to whieh, like drowning men, they clutched with the fond hope that it was to rescue their client from her imminent peril. : Atzeroth in Bias Cell. Atzeroth passed the night i)revi6us to the execution without any particular manifestations. He prayed' and cried alternately, but made no otner noise -that at tracted the attention of his keeper, On the morning of the execution he sat most of the time on- the floor of hiscell inhissbU't sleeves. A Mysterious Visitant. He was attended by a lady dressed in deep blfpk, who carried a prayer book, and who seemed more exercised in spirit than the prisoner -himself. "Who the lady was could not be ascertained. She left him at Half-past twelve o'clock, and exhibited great emotion at parting. . During the morning A.tze-roth was greatly composed, abet spent part of the time in earnest conversation with his spiritual adviser, Rev. Mr. Butler, of St. Paul's Lu- thcran'ClKJrdh, Washington. He occupied cell No. 151 on the ground floor to-day, which was directly In view of'theyaTrd, whepeh©1 could see the gathering crowd and soldiery, although he could not see the .scaffold; Ite^sat io the corner of his cell on his bed, and when bis spiritual adviser would go out for a few minutes' and lea vehis testament in his hands, bis eyes would be dropped to itm a moment, and occasionally wander with a wild look towards the open: window in front of his cell. ' ' 17bs Costume. He wore nothing but a white lineu shirt and a grey pair of pants. The long irons upon his hands, which., he had worn during the trial, were not removed. A Partial Confession. Atzefoth made a partial confession to the Rev. Mr. Butler, a few hours- before his execution. He stated trxat he took a room at the Kirkwood House on Thurs day afternoon, and was engaged in erideavorine* to get a pass to Richmond. He then heard the President was to be taken to the theatre and there captured. He said he understood that Booth was to rent the theatre for tbe purpose of carrying-out the plot to capture the then President. ,He stated that Hlarold brought the pistol and knife to the Kirkwood House, and that he (Atzeroth) had nothing to do with the attempted assas sination of Andrevv Johnson. Harold to Have Murdered Mr. Johnson. Booth intended that Harold should assassinate Johnson* and he wanted him, Atzeroth, to back him up and.give him courage. Booth thought that Harold had more pluck than Atzeroth. The Original Plot. He alluded to the meeting atthe restaurant aboutthe middle of March, He said Booth, Harold, Payne,. Arnold arid himself were present and it was then con certed that Mr.Lfnooln shouldbe captured and. taken to Richmond. They- heard that Lincoln wag , to visit a camp near ¦Washington, and the plan \vas .that they should pro ceed there and capture the coach and horses contain ing Lincoln,' and run him through Prince Qeorge's county and Old Fields to G. B. There they were to leave the coach and horses and place the President in wbnggy which Harold weald have-on hand, and thus convey him to aboattobniiireadiness,andruiihimby some roeansi to Richmond. He denies thathewasm Javorof assassinating Lincoln, but was willing to as sist in his capture. Mis Si«iowle_ -, ¦ I wish to assure the Court that no disrespect was in tended to it by the delay to ( which it has been una-, yoidabiy subjected* .The Court (declined to make any order in the case, The Attorney-General and General Haneocfejln ohedlehcVto the writ, makes the follow^ ing return:— '¦'¦¦¦¦ '- ¦ ¦. - Head-quarters' Middle Military Division", Washington, D.- C, July 7, 1865.— To tttoh. Andrew Wylie, Justice, of - the Supreme Court of the District . of ii .Columbia in- 1 hereby acknowledge the service of the writ hereto .attached, ahd. return the, same, and respectluHy say that the body of Mary •E. Snrratt is In my. possession, under ahd by' virtue of an order of Andrew Johnson,, President of the United State*? aud Coinmabder-hv Chief of the Army and 1Xfffryt tor the , purposes in said order expressed, a copy .of .which ..is Jiereto .attached and made part of this return; aind that: I do -not produce said body by reason. of.the:order, ofi the President of theUnited States, indorsed upou said writ,- to which reference is hereby respectfully made, dated July 7, 1865. - < ¦ WINFIELD B; HANCOCK, Maji-Gen. U^SiVols;, Commanding Middle Di v. ' The Presidents Indorsement. ^Ex.ecutive Office, July 7, 1865, 10 A. M.— To Major- fierieral-W, S. Hancock,, Commander, &a— I, Andrew Johnson, ^President of the ;United States, do hereby declare that the writ of habeas corpus; has been here tofore suspend*** in-such cases' as this, and I do hereby especially suspend this - American Notes, Pic Nic Papers, - Christmas Carols, - Above are each In one large octavo volume, paper cover. We also publish twenty-eight other editions of Dickens' WorkB, comprising the Library, the People's and the Illus trated editions, in both octavo and duodecimo form, at prices varying from jfris. 00 to £100.00 a set, according to the edition and style of binding. G. W. M. REYNOLDS' "WORKS. Rosa Lambert, - - 1 00 Mary Price, - - 1 00 Eustace Quentln, - 1 00 Xoseph.Wilmatt.-. - 1 00 Banker's Daughter, - 100 Kenneth, -- - - 1 00 The -Rye-Houfte Plot. 1 00 The Necromancer, - 1 00 cover. . Each one of a finer Mysteries of the Court of London, Uotoe -Foster, Caroline of Bruns wick, - Venetia Trelawney, - Lord Saxdndale, ¦Count Qhristoval, - - 1 00 1 50 1 00 1001 00 1 00 Above are each In /paper c ' in cloth, for £200 each. edition, Is also bound The Opera Dancer, -. The Ruined Gamester, 50 Child of Waterloo, - 50 Ciprhia, or Secrets of a Picture Gallery, - B0 gobert Bruce, 75 iscartW Queen, - 50 The Gipsey Chief, - 75 Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots, ... 75 Wallace, H«oS«#tland, 75 Isabella Viu cent, - 75 Vivian Bertram, - 75 Countess of Lascellei, 75 Duke of Marchnjont, The Soldier's Wife, - May Sliddleton,- Massacre of Glencoe, Queen Joanha, or the . Court of Naples, - Loves" of the Harem, - Ellen Percr, - - Agnes Evelyn, - Pickwick Abroad, - Parricide, ' - - - Life In Pttrls, ¦ - Countess and the Page, Edgar Montrotw, 7575 75 n £07S5075 CHARLES LEVER!S WORKS. Charles O'Malley, - 75 Arthur O'Leary, • 75 Harry Lorrequer, - 75 Con Cregan, - . 75 Jack III u ton, 75 Davenport Dunn, • 75 Tom Burke of Ohm, - 75 Horace Templeton, - 75 Knight of Gwynne, - - 75 Kate O'Donoghue, - 75 We also publish a Military Edition of Lever's Novels, with Illuminated covers in colors, price 75 cents each. A finer edition of the above are also published, each one complete in one volume, cloth, price #2.00 a volume. Ten Thousand a Year, I The Diary of a Medical one vol., paper, - 1 50 J Student, 7a ALEXANDER DUMAS' WORKS. Count ot Monte Cristo, 150 Tbe Iron Mask, - - 1 00 Louise Lb, Vall'ere, - 1 00 Memoirs of a Marquis, 1 00. -4MW*Sl»Wc,'l40"> - i oo ¦TheThw? Guardsmen, 7". Tw.'i' Vl,.,, After, 75 Memoirs ofa Physician,! 00 Queen's Necklace, . 1 00 Six Years Later, - 1 00 Countess of Charny,- 1 00 Audrae de Taverney, 1 00 yiffifrf&P r}:iRrdrr-nr ?5 Trie. ,r,..; I , jijri. - ," TK i";' slier, 1 04 f B>« .-.b,.v- ore tin jiuhUshe.1, ", ',, !,rloe .i'J.'Ju eaoh. ISO ] •- -. nllls, - 1 r>arir,r cloth I'.-i.-e (J.flO, A. fleer fcditt..Ti of carl '-¦uudin otic wluu, - ¦-. The Causer! ply .«hove arc each '•; or.e vo V. !.- : .ilronul.UsN.r! Is, „„» .. I;l.«.>,*n;tl, . S0ISktt,hc, |„ France. , L,|.„t-d flan,-, ^..j, to., ,-,!BBrHll> <" . ., , ,.0.1,6. - - - SO I Mohl, •„!,.,¦ ¦ ,'..rl,. . 50 Fct.ua de Chamuars, M | Mar Vila Hvc '."Ives, 71 I The Ifr.rrurri. Pur*.,, 50 I T> in Li-utruants, »S * Annette, '.'ftflj' -f V,;i"*'., $\ v K?" Copies of cay "f the a*w)*a „•»¦¦:: kg *¦»•.« '"»**'«}; .* ,— s— MRS. SOUTHWORTH'S WORKS. The Bridal Eve. The Fatal Marriage, Love's Labor Won, - 1 50 Deserted Wife, - • 1 so The Gipsy's Prophecy, 1 SO The : Mother-ln-Law, 1 SO Haunted Homestead. 1 " The Lost Heiress, • Lady ot* tbe Isle, The Two Sisters, . The Three Beauties, Vivla;, Secret Power, The Missing Bride, - 1 SO 1 J0 1 Wife's Victory, - - 1 so 1 SO I Retribution, - . 1 so India. Pearl River, 1 SO Curse of Clifton, -150 Discarded Daughter, 1 so The Initials, - - 1 so The Jealous Husband, 1 50 Self-Sacriflce, . ¦ I so Belle of Washington, 1 SO Kate Aylesford, - -150 Courtship* Matrimony 1 SO Family Pride, - . 1 50 The Woman in Black, 1 50 I 50 I 50 1 SO ISO 1 SO The above are each In one volume, paper cover. Each book is also published in one volume, cloth, price 5100. Hickory Hall, . > SO I Broken Engagement, 25 CAROLINE LEE HENTZ'S WORKS. The Lost Daughter, - ISO The Planter's North- .ern . : , ba£are issuers, .'-00 Hiss he'". ¦> New Gookerv 1. ¦>,, . . - 3 00 Wlu.'.^eMHiN"* [.'. -k .: A, Si"'. ¦"¦». lla'as K..-..ii.!,ror *!-, "Hillwn, . - - t ,V »s Leslie :;w r.m,,t. tor Ci»,k«c.', - - . 8 '"> " !•'• ;>:w O. ok Rn.V . " . . • »M '» Ocleb^tr,.! tM.'k He" Tr,eMod«rn Cook, w. m 62 UlttBtr&ti. ».!... WO ' »efev& pages' S CC . GREEN'S WORKS OM GAMBLING C/.vi'!'«s,Eiro«er>. 1 J01 TheWfPM'.iicd Gamhlsrl S6 YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 9002 01330 9340 '¦'v—:'^ ':•-¦".* mmmmmsm ¦-:;~ ¦,•-. •¦;•;¦•' IHlil