The Cleveland leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1865-1865, 1865-07-21
A CARD.
A GAhDs
WLsHrNnronr. InI7 20

ratt. 1 beg to state that the facts in the
case are as follows:
On the 9th inst, the Rev. Mr.. Walter
called at the War Department and asked
for pass 70 visit Mrs. Surrstt in the mlll-
itary prison, saying if he was not mistaken
she had expressed desire to see him. l
submitted his request to the Secretary of
War, who st once said that pass might
be given. Neither the Rev. Mr.. Walter
nor myself knew of the approval of the
sentence of the Military Commission in the
csse of Mrs. Surratt sent to Rev. Mr.
Walter a pass, but after hearing that 8
pass signed by myself might not under the
circumstances be accepted by the officer in
charge OF the prison, in order that there
might be no possibility of disappointment
in the admission of q clergyman to afford
the necessary spiritual services, sent Mr.
Barry. a clerk in my office, to see Bev. Mr..
Walter, and to tell him it would be better not
TO 90 on the pass sent, bat that l would
again see the Secretary of War, and &C ho
had assented to the visit of the clergyman
| to the prisoner, would get pass signed by
himself, as otherwise there was q possibility
| of his being put to the trouble Of going to
xhe prison without being enabled 70 secure
| admission. 1t was also q part of my de-
! sign that Mr.. Barry should impress upon
| Rev. Mr.. w. the necessity of good faith in
the use of the pass when replaced. Alter
! thus sending Mr. Barry to Father Walter
L went to the Secretary and asked his own,
| signature to a pass, as referred to above.
| When, upon his signing which, said to
| him, was confident the pass would be
used solely for the purpose for which it
was asked-a profession visit TO sdminis-
ter the sscrsments, and to prepare the per-
son TO be visited, for death. Upon Mr..
| Barry's (my messenger to the Rev. Mr..
| WI return, be informed me Of the violent
! and excited language of Father Walter
Nth regard to the trial and the result,
w, Ich he, Mr.. Walter, had heard after
Iesy ing the War Department. On this
went myself TO see The Rev. Mr.. w. to
canton rim, as his we'll Wisher, and SIS
friend of she church, and in my private ca
psoitv entirely, With regard to the use Of
language so infammstory as that which
he had indulged in at this time OF great
public excitement, introduced the conver-
sation by stating what he had said had
made an impression upon the mind Of my
messenger, who had repeated his remsrks
to me. I explained to him, ss l have said
shove, that there might be possibility OF
his not getting into prison on my pass, and
that l had therefore asked the Secretary of
War for q pass, signed by himself, on CIV
ing which | had said that l was confident
it would not be used for any
other purpose than the one for
which It was asked, and l wanted him
(Mr. Walters) to be so governed that
would be safe in the assertion had made.
Mr.. w. had displayed so much excitement
and temper that it was duty OF charity
on my part, in view of all the clrcum-
stances, to endesvor to induce him to pur-
sue a more discreet course and TO counsel
him 30 be sifout, DoCHme MS place on
these topics. l asked him IN 3
friendly and kindly way to promise
me that he would desist from talking
about the matter of Mr.. Walters convlc-
tions as to the innocence Of the prisoner.
1t was OF too inAsmmstorY a character,
and the effect of his observations at this
period, when the public mind was agitsted,
could not but be mischievOus, and since
proacn Sne sdUJstt with temper ulrtI -rrrsero-
tion it was better that he should let 1t
alone. This was q confidential converse
tion between myself and Mr.. Walter, as
has been seen. The visit was not at ell Of
fcial, but entirely that OF private lndl-
VI, 1usl. My motives were laudable. They
vere to restrain imprudent and misehleV.
ons disc,,ssions, and to ensure the use OF
the mass 20 be given. The visit was not
snggested bI the Secretary of War, or
even known to him u2til the present time.
On this point, after whstt had said,
Jon,t see how Mr.. Walter could nave an
dsrstood me, IS being prompted by ln-
ssrnctions in my conversation. In rePtglng
to noe the Rev. Mr.. w. was very vlolcnt
and generally denunciatory. Thersnge OF
his conversation was quite wide. He ha-
ranged upon the administration and there
hellion. and dwelt with bitterness on what
he called military tyranny, &c. He said,
| nrobablv. all that he is represented, IN
tbe fourth paragraph of the article in ques-
tion. ss having said, and much more that
| nrndent priest, loyal citizen, or a man OF
common sense would MT have said.
During all this time 1 was endesvoring
to counsel moderation, instructing him
AGAINST his expressions, and eDjoining pru-
| dence. I don't know that 1 ought to pa
| tronizs the Rev. Mr.. Walter st all, and
| the phrsses which allude 10 this and the
| INDIGNANT reicinder of Father W. do not
bring TO nv mind the recollection OF the
| scane described. / did not tell Father w !.
that he should not have pass ifhe diS
not promise to say nothing of Mrs. Sur
rstt's innocence. Annoyed by what he
had said, 1 Was about, however, to leave
the room, and 70 defer giving him the pass,
| remarking, will send you word as TO the
psss in two hours, when he said, l prom
ise.
I intended within two hours TO see the
\ -, kkak
was convinced, after what had taken place,
that Father w. was not in proper disPosi-
| tion and frame of mind to be a suit
able religious attendant upon the
prisoner, and that under the cir
cumstances the services OF another
nriest should be procured for her, when Mr..
Walter said he hsd determined to be
governed by considerations of prudence. 1
gave him pass, believing he would per-
form what he had undertaken. Nor did l,
when 1 designed to withdraw from father
walter without giving him the pass, by
any means intend that his acts should have
the effect to deprive the prisoner cf the
services of the clergy. My view on the
contrary was only that some other priest
should 90 In fact another priest did go.
It has been my fortune TO be the means of
sending clergy to attend many during the
war in need of their services, and never
threw straw in the way of any clergy
mau, of any faith, visiting penitent man,
loyal or disloyal, living or dying, when his
services were called, for could not see or
know of person of my own creed dying
without giving any assistance in my power
to procure the attendance of priest.
In regard to the denial of passes to the
Rev. Mr. Walter to visit the prisoner when
i'll, referred to in the last paragraph of
the article in question, Father Walter stated
to my messenger that he had been re-
uuested by Mrs. Surratt shortly after she
was arrested and since, 10 visit her, but that
: he had refused to do 80, not desiring TO have
his name IN it till the trial was over,
and did not seek to meddle with Mr.. Wal
tsr's convictions as to the innocence of Mrs.
Surratt; nor did attempt 10 restrain him
} from the use of any proper efforts to bring
bis convictions TO notice in quarters where
. his representations might be of Avail. So
far from this, an hour or two after the con-
] versation referred to, when he called upon
3 me at the War Department and told me
that he could not get admittance with the
8 daughter of the prisoner to the Executive