Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-07-26
.QD|R|iljoI D|R|iljoIi:s:;4S;ta)ts,s';.uI)lai,Iln1t,, ,';.I)l i,Il1t,
.Hardie,s Narrative.

'AAHA AAhO - INe.hA eNNhvfOe lNt H|
|oI General Hardie's card, published by vs.
yesterday, exculpates Secretary, Stanton
from the charge OF having required from
the Catholic clergyman who visited Mrs!
Surratt in her cell and attended her on the
scaffold, q pledge that he would not assert
her Innocence when she was brought out
for execution. Unfortunately for the Cen
eral, hishaYrative will impress most minds
with the, conviction that he required such a
promise. and that his conversation with
Father Walter led the latter to osuppose that
the condition of his being permitted tovisit
Mrs. Surratt was that helshOuld maintain
silence as to any statement made byt ther
concerning The injustice Of the sentence,
The General says Father Walter had used
violent language in denOuncing the verdict,
which being reported ito him by Barry, he
waited upon the father ito, counsel him to
be silent upon these topics,n He "asked
him, in kind and friendly way, TO promise
that he would desist from talking about the
matter.ile What topics and what matter
does General Hardie refer to? Clearly the
trial and sentence. They were what the
priest had been talking about. His cons
versation may have been more forcible than
courteous, and such as to Justify the Gene
raj in ecantioning him to the use of more
DCLupCldUC tADICSSiOtcJ uuU buCH CduUlOD
was not given. A promise was required and
apromise was given! The priest not ask
ed to be more guarded, but to refrain entirely
from speaking abouU"the matter,n |? e., the
trial and sentence. When Father Walter
first asked for pass, he had not heard the
verdict and sentence He learned of these
after his application for pass, and it was
upon being informed of them, as the Gene
raj alleges, that he used such violent Ian
guage that the General deemed it his duty
to visit him and COUNSEL him to keep silent.
'u Be it remembered that the priest was
waiting all this time for the pass, and
anxious to visit Mrs. Surratt, whose eXecu-
ton was to take place only few hours
hence. General Hardie had tile pass in his
pocket while thus advising Father Walter
Ito be silent upon these topics" Did he
fear that the priest would do mischief in
discussing them in the cell of the con-
demned? Before whom and where was he
to keep silentp Was.i it at all probable that
he would turn the attention of the woman
whose hours were numheredf from the prep
aration for death which he was then to as
sist her in making, to a consideration of the
injustice of her sentence, if twas unjust,
and to vain regrets over a tate that was in
evitable? Did General Hardie suppose he
would visit Mrs. Surratt for the purpose of
reviewing the law and evidence in her case,
when it was already decided, and the re-
view would be buta crimipal trifling with
the few hours that interviewed between her
and death /? He was required to keep silent
before others than Mrs. Snrratt. This tells
us ochere he was to keep silent, because he
was going directly from the presence of
Hardie to her cell, there to remain until the
hour for execution arrived, and to accom-
pany her to the scaffOld. Could he have
SO far forgotten his solemn duty as to
introduce, under such circumstances,
matter so irrelevant to its proper PERFORM
ance, his voice would have been lost in the
cell and could have availed nothing in
producing that ''agitation Of the public
mind" the contemplation of which made
the strong heart of the valient soldier beat
with fearful apprehension. 1twas after he
came out from the cell and stood as her pas
tor by the side of the condemned on the scaf-
fold that the General feared he would speak,
and by a protestation of her innocence give
to the infamy of her lawless trial blacker
and more damning hue in impressing upon
the public mind the revolving injustice of
its conclusion. We have in the subjoined
extract the substance OF the interview, as
narrated by the Generals
a1 :" did not tell Father Walter that he
should not have pass if he didn't promise
to say nothing of Mrs. Surratt's innocence.
Annoyed bywhat he had said, was about,
however, to leave the room and to defer
giving him the pass, remarking, Twill send
you word as tothe pass intwo hours when
he said, Il PROMISE" d I8 g-. .l.t.
What was he required to promise?r That
he would keep silent. We have seen before
whom and where. If General Hardie does
himself injustice in. his narrative, it Is his
misfortune. No man of common sense, in
reading the above, can come to any other
conclusion, than that Father Walter yeas
impressed with the belief that he could not
gain admittance to Mrs. Surratt except by
giving the promise.--C Chicago Times. laiir