The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-08 00:00:00

18th, instead of on Friday, 21st, as he testified,
Wednesday.
The examination of witnesses was then resumed,
and John Lee was sworn, who at the time of the
asassination was the chief detective of Provost-
Marshal O'Brien. While going up to Willard's
Hotel and opposite Steinmetz's hat store he passed
a man whom he took to be Surratt. To the best
of his knowledge the prisoner at the bar was the
man he met. The witness then repeated the evidence
given on the assassination trial, in relation to what
took place at the Kirkwood House the day after the
assassination. In the cross-examination by Mr.
Bradley, the witness said that Surratt was pointed
out to him at the depot as a blockade-runner. He
did not know when that was, but it was many
months before the assassination, and the witness
knew him in no other way except that his name
was Surratt, and that he was said to be a rebel.
It was the duty of the marshal's detectives to find
out where such people belonged. The witness said
that he did not testify to Surratt's presence in the
conspiracy trials, because he was not asked the
question. He knew that Surratt was implicated in
the conspiracy, but did not think it necessary to say
any thing about his presence unless interrogated. It
was between four and five o'clock p.m. when he
saw Surratt on April 14. Surratt was coming
down and he was going up when he met him.
William E. Cleaver, was sworn and examined—
" I was the partner of Hr. Rainey, in the livery
stable, where Booth kept his horse, and was familiar
with Surratt. January 12, 1865, Surratt came to
hire a horse, and previous to this time Booth and
Surratt had always come together. On this occa-
sion Surratt came alone, and at 3 o'clock ordered
Booth's horse ready at 7 o'clock. It was then rain-
ing hard, and I asked him if he was going to the
country such a night as that. He said that he was
going to T. 8.,' to a party. I asked him to go to
the Clarendon to take a drink, and he said that he
had enough, and I thought he had too. Booth had
not yet come, and I asked Surratt to take a seat in
the office. He said that he and Booth were going
to the country to meet a party to help them across the
river ; that they were going to do some bloody
work ; that they were going to kill Lincoln, the old
scoundrel, as he had ruined Maryland and the
whole South, and be would kill him himself. Sur-
ratt showed his pistol, and said that he represented
two counties in Maryland. Booth came in at 8
o'clock, and Surratt chided him for being so late and
keeping him waiting. I was in Washington on the
day of the assassination, and was out that afternoon
exercising a black horse, and rode to,the navy-yard
bridge. While going along II street that day I met
John H. Surratt. He was riding along II street.
I spoke to him, and said, How are you, John ?'
and he nodded to me. He was dressed in a rusty
coloured suit, and wore a sort of jockey cap on his
head.
Cross-examined by Dr. Bradley.—" Surratt was
dressed rather rough, and wore something around
his neck like a victorine. I met him behind the
printing office and the railroad. It was about four
o'clock when I met him." The witness was ques-
tioned as to his testimony at the military commis-
sion, and said that he had not told them anything
of what he had just said, because he was not asked.
The witness knew that Surratt was implicated in the
conspiracy, but did not deem it necessary to men-
tion the fact of having met him, because he knew
Surratt and wanted to shield him if possible. "I,
however, told that Surratt came to my stable with
Booth."

" Did you ever take a horse to break for me ?"

" Yes, sir."
" Did you sell bim ?"
" Yes, sir."
" Did you ever give me any money for him ?"

" No, sir."
" You sold him without my authority."
" No, sir ; I had your authority."
" Are you the same Dr. Cleaver who was con-
victed here of committing a rape upon a poor little
girl, and in whose case a new trial has been
granted ?"
Mr. Carrington here objected that the witness
was not bound to answer.
Witness—" I decline to answer that question."
Mr. Carrington said the question should not have
been asked, but Mr. Bradley insisted that he had a
right to ask the question. The witness could
answer or not as he pleased. The witness was
asked where he was within the last three weeks, and
he declined to answer, as it would tend to degrade
him.
" Have you seen and spoken to Sanford Conover,
alias Charles A. Dunham ?"
" Yes, sir."
" Did you tell Conover all about this ?"
" I did, sir. I told him pretty much what I said

here."
" How did you happen to tell Conover ?"
" We were talking about the Surratt trial, and I
told him about hiring horses to Surratt."
"Did Conover write down what you told him?"

" He did not as I saw."
" Where did you see Conover ?"
"In this city at a house on 4th Street. The
house has a lot around it, and extends up to G
Street. I have told other parties besides Conover.
Told a man named Lewis, who was in my employ.
I would not have told all about it now if it had not
been for Sanford Conover."
Brooks, a stabler, was sworn and examined by
Mr. Pierrepont. The witness had charge of J. L.
Howard's livery stable on G- Street, between Sixth
and Seventh, in 1865. He knew Booth, Atzcrodt,
and Surratt. The latter put his horses at livery at
the stable, and gave orders that Booth, but no one
else but imself, should get the horses. Booth,
Surratt, and Atzerodt came to the stables together,
and sometimes separately. The witness here pro-
duced a paper in Surratt's handwriting, which was
read to the jury. It basso note dated March 26,
1866, and was written y rratt te the witness, re-
turning a team which he had hired, and requesting
the witness to let Booth have his (Surratt's) horses.
'rhe order was offered in evidence, and the witness
resumed, and said that he bad seed
received n Surratt ride out
with Booth and Atzerdot, and ha
note from Surratt and also one from Mrs. Surratt.
The witness was asked if he had had any conversa-
tion with Atzerodt about Surratt in April, 1865.
Mr. Bradley objected to the question, as the con-
versation related to a note which was not in court.
Mr. Pierrepont suggested that it would be best to
postpone further investigation until the note was
produced, and the court thereupon took a recess
until ten o'clock on Friday morning.

THE AMAZON AND OSPREY COLLISION.—On Fri-
day, at the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
Chief Baron Kelly gave judgment in this case, which was
an appeal from the Court of Admiralty. Tho finding of
the Court of Admiralty, that the Amazon was to Wale,
%to affirmed by Unix lordohigs.